CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO
CACE.TO (Avantis CIBC Canadian Equity ETF) and CLSA.TO (Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF) are both Canada Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CACE.TO charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CLSA.TO.
Performance
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CACE.TO
- 1D
- 1.02%
- 1M
- 5.11%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CLSA.TO
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- 7.65%
- YTD
- 22.07%
- 6M
- 30.64%
- 1Y
- 72.56%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CACE.TO Avantis CIBC Canadian Equity ETF | 5.77% |
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF | 16.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between CACE.TO and CLSA.TO is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 23, 2026 | 0.69 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CACE.TO
CLSA.TO
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Avantis CIBC Canadian Equity ETF (CACE.TO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.TO). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CACE.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 5.03 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.33 | 4.33 | -3.00 |
Drawdowns
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CACE.TO drawdown since its inception was -10.51%, smaller than the maximum CLSA.TO drawdown of -11.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CACE.TO and CLSA.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CACE.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.51% | -11.73% | +1.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -10.78% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.82% | -1.36% | -1.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.51% | — |
Volatility
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CACE.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.20% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 12.39% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.37% | 14.50% | +1.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.37% | 16.54% | -0.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.37% | 16.54% | -0.17% |
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CACE.TO has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSA.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
CACE.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Dividend Comparison
CACE.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CLSA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.64%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CACE.TO Avantis CIBC Canadian Equity ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF | 10.64% | 7.99% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CACE.TO and CLSA.TO have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CACE.TO is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CACE.TO is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CLSA.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Avantis and Brompton Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for CACE.TO and 0.60% for CLSA.TO.
Find the right allocation for CACE.TO and CLSA.TO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer