CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO
CASH.TO (Global X High Interest Savings ETF) and CWO.NEO (iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CASH.TO is a Money Market fund actively managed by Global X, while CWO.NEO is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index. CASH.TO is actively managed, while CWO.NEO is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CASH.TO returned 3.56%/yr vs 21.74%/yr for CWO.NEO. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. CASH.TO charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.73%/yr for CWO.NEO.
Performance
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CASH.TO achieves a 0.95% return, which is significantly lower than CWO.NEO's 12.28% return.
CASH.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.15%
- YTD
- 0.95%
- 6M
- 1.03%
- 1Y
- 2.21%
- 3Y*
- 3.56%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CWO.NEO
- 1D
- -2.31%
- 1M
- 1.77%
- YTD
- 12.28%
- 6M
- 12.99%
- 1Y
- 30.33%
- 3Y*
- 21.74%
- 5Y*
- 11.21%
- 10Y*
- 11.23%
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CASH.TO Global X High Interest Savings ETF | 0.95% | 2.45% | 4.53% | 5.11% | 2.38% | 0.08% |
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF | 12.28% | 26.34% | 22.33% | 9.56% | -9.03% | 1.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between CASH.TO and CWO.NEO is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2021 | -0.00 |
The correlation between CASH.TO and CWO.NEO shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to -0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
CASH.TO
CWO.NEO
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO) and iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| CASH.TO | CWO.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +7.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +23.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 6.92 | 1.36 | +5.56 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 111.05 | 2.81 | +108.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 381.96 | 10.29 | +371.67 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CASH.TO drawdown since its inception was -0.80%, smaller than the maximum CWO.NEO drawdown of -31.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CASH.TO and CWO.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CASH.TO | CWO.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.80% | -31.99% | +31.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.02% | -10.90% | +10.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.06% | -17.12% | +17.06% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.80% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -31.97% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.74% | +2.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.00% | -10.26% | +10.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 2.96% | -2.95% |
Volatility
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO) is 0.05%, while iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) has a volatility of 7.01%. This indicates that CASH.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CWO.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CASH.TO | CWO.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.05% | 7.01% | -6.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.15% | 13.68% | -13.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.23% | 16.52% | -16.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.61% | 16.87% | -16.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.61% | 17.51% | -16.90% |
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CASH.TO has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than CWO.NEO's 0.73% expense ratio.
Dividends
CASH.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Dividend Comparison
CASH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.19%, less than CWO.NEO's 2.48% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CASH.TO Global X High Interest Savings ETF | 2.19% | 2.53% | 4.37% | 5.05% | 2.30% | 0.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF | 2.48% | 2.79% | 3.50% | 4.14% | 5.03% | 4.61% | 2.64% | 3.01% | 3.22% | 2.60% | 2.57% | 3.23% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CASH.TO and CWO.NEO have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CASH.TO is cheaper at 0.11% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CASH.TO is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CWO.NEO.
CASH.TO is categorized as Money Market, while CWO.NEO is Emerging Markets Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for CASH.TO and 0.73% for CWO.NEO.
Find the right allocation for CASH.TO and CWO.NEO
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