BMAX.TO vs. CLSM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BMAX.TO (Brompton Enhanced Multi-Asset Income ETF) and CLSM (Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BMAX.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund managed by Brompton Funds, while CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed. Over the past 3 years, BMAX.TO returned 18.63%/yr vs 15.07%/yr for CLSM. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BMAX.TO charges 2.62%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for CLSM.

Performance

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Brompton Enhanced Multi-Asset Income ETF (BMAX.TO) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BMAX.TO is traded in CAD, while CLSM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CLSM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BMAX.TO achieves a 9.27% return, which is significantly lower than CLSM's 21.98% return.

BMAX.TO

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 4.64%
• YTD: 9.27%
• 6M: 9.79%
• 1Y: 22.18%
• 3Y*: 18.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSM

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 11.41%
• YTD: 21.98%
• 6M: 19.72%
• 1Y: 35.94%
• 3Y*: 15.07%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BMAX.TO Brompton Enhanced Multi-Asset Income ETF	9.27%	17.88%	19.42%	11.56%	6.10%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	21.98%	10.03%	10.62%	1.49%	-2.91%

Correlation

The correlation between BMAX.TO and CLSM is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2022	0.43

Over the past year, BMAX.TO and CLSM have become more correlated (0.70) than their long-term average of 0.43, meaning their price movements have been converging.

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BMAX.TO	CLSM
Financial Services	24.1%	0.1%
Technology	18.8%	51.8%
Healthcare	17.0%	1.4%
Industrials	13.0%	1.0%
Energy	7.0%	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	34.8%
Utilities	4.4%	0.5%
Communication Services	4.3%	5.5%
Basic Materials	2.6%	0.4%
Consumer Cyclical	2.6%	4.4%
Real Estate	1.3%	0.0%

Return for Risk

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BMAX.TO

BMAX.TO Risk / Return Rank: 59
BMAX.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
BMAX.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
BMAX.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 62
BMAX.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
BMAX.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 59

CLSM

CLSM Risk / Return Rank: 82
CLSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
CLSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
CLSM Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CLSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CLSM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brompton Enhanced Multi-Asset Income ETF (BMAX.TO) and Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	BMAX.TO	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	2.94	-0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.01	3.91	-0.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.56	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	4.41	-2.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.46	18.91	-8.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BMAX.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the CLSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BMAX.TO and CLSM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BMAX.TO	CLSM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	2.94	-0.85
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.38	0.55	+0.83

Drawdowns

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BMAX.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.42%, smaller than the maximum CLSM drawdown of -23.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BMAX.TO and CLSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BMAX.TO	CLSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.42%	-23.80%	+8.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.35%	-8.19%	-1.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.42%	-13.96%	-1.46%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.96%	0.00%	-0.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.90%	-12.45%	+10.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.13%	1.91%	+0.22%

Volatility

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brompton Enhanced Multi-Asset Income ETF (BMAX.TO) is 3.27%, while Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) has a volatility of 3.49%. This indicates that BMAX.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BMAX.TO	CLSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.27%	3.49%	-0.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.81%	10.16%	-1.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.62%	12.28%	-1.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.13%	12.09%	+1.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.13%	12.09%	+1.04%

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BMAX.TO has a 2.62% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSM's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

BMAX.TO vs. CLSM - Dividend Comparison

BMAX.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.59%, more than CLSM's 0.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BMAX.TO Brompton Enhanced Multi-Asset Income ETF	9.59%	9.70%	9.64%	9.55%	2.41%	0.00%
CLSM Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF	0.75%	0.90%	2.13%	2.58%	3.17%	0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BMAX.TO and CLSM in my portfolio?

BMAX.TO and CLSM have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BMAX.TO or CLSM?

On fees, CLSM is cheaper at 0.82% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BMAX.TO or CLSM?

CLSM is cheaper with a 0.82% expense ratio, compared with 2.62% for BMAX.TO.

What is the main difference between BMAX.TO and CLSM?

BMAX.TO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CLSM is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Brompton Funds and Cabana. Their fees differ too: 2.62% for BMAX.TO and 0.82% for CLSM.