PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO) and Global X Nasdaq-100 Index Corporate Class ETF (HXQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CASH.TO achieves a 1.20% return, which is significantly lower than HXQ.TO's 14.56% return.


CASH.TO

1D
0.02%
1M
0.16%
6M
1.05%
YTD
1.20%
1Y
2.15%
3Y*
3.46%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
3.32%

HXQ.TO

1D
0.69%
1M
-5.98%
6M
12.81%
YTD
14.56%
1Y
26.47%
3Y*
24.20%
5Y*
16.73%
10Y*
21.14%
ALL TIME*
21.11%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$17.66MCA$17.50MCA$19.60M
CA$2.97MCA$3.02MCA$3.91M

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CASH.TO
Global X High Interest Savings ETF
1.20%2.45%4.53%5.11%2.38%0.08%
HXQ.TO
Global X Nasdaq-100 Index Corporate Class ETF
14.56%15.05%35.98%51.16%-27.84%4.25%

Correlation

The correlation between CASH.TO and HXQ.TO is -0.01, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.01

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2021

0.01

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. HXQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CASH.TO
CASH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
CASH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CASH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
CASH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
CASH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
CASH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank

HXQ.TO
HXQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
HXQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO) and Global X Nasdaq-100 Index Corporate Class ETF (HXQ.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.

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.TOHXQ.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+8.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+23.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

6.81

1.23

+5.58

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

108.97

1.90

+107.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

374.82

5.49

+369.32

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CASH.TO Sharpe Ratio is 9.38, which is higher than the HXQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CASH.TO and HXQ.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CASH.TO drawdown since its inception was -0.80%, smaller than the maximum HXQ.TO drawdown of -31.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CASH.TO and HXQ.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CASH.TOHXQ.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.80%

-31.60%

+30.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.02%

-12.43%

+12.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.06%

-22.58%

+22.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.60%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-7.80%

+7.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

0.00%

-5.72%

+5.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.01%

4.30%

-4.29%

Volatility

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO) is 0.08%, while Global X Nasdaq-100 Index Corporate Class ETF (HXQ.TO) has a volatility of 6.71%. This indicates that CASH.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HXQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CASH.TOHXQ.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.08%

6.71%

-6.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.16%

15.67%

-15.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23%

18.98%

-18.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.60%

21.29%

-20.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.60%

21.07%

-20.47%

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CASH.TO has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than HXQ.TO's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

CASH.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

CASH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, while HXQ.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
CASH.TO
Global X High Interest Savings ETF
2.11%2.53%4.37%5.05%2.30%0.10%
HXQ.TO
Global X Nasdaq-100 Index Corporate Class ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CASH.TO and HXQ.TO have a correlation of -0.01, 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 0.25% for HXQ.TO.

CASH.TO is categorized as Money Market, while HXQ.TO is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for CASH.TO and 0.25% for HXQ.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CASH.TO and HXQ.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