CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CAUS.TO (Avantis CIBC U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF) and CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. CAUS.TO is actively managed, while CLU.NEO is passively managed. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CAUS.TO charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CLU.NEO.

Performance

CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Avantis CIBC U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF (CAUS.TO) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CAUS.TO

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: 6.07%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLU.NEO

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 1.57%
• YTD: 8.69%
• 6M: 10.48%
• 1Y: 24.65%
• 3Y*: 16.95%
• 5Y*: 9.30%
• 10Y*: 11.02%

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

CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CAUS.TO Avantis CIBC U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF	10.74%
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class	3.52%

Correlation

The correlation between CAUS.TO and CLU.NEO is 0.63, 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	0.63

Return for Risk

CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLU.NEO

CLU.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 81
CLU.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
CLU.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
CLU.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 88
CLU.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
CLU.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Avantis CIBC U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF (CAUS.TO) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CAUS.TO	CLU.NEO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.64	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.79	0.61	+2.18

Drawdowns

CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAUS.TO drawdown since its inception was -6.25%, smaller than the maximum CLU.NEO drawdown of -39.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAUS.TO and CLU.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAUS.TO	CLU.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.25%	-39.93%	+33.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-6.55%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.57%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.66%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.93%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.70%	+0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.66%	-4.74%	+3.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.70%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CAUS.TO	CLU.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.30%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	7.24%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.47%	10.11%	+5.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.47%	14.54%	+0.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.47%	18.08%	-2.61%

CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAUS.TO has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than CLU.NEO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAUS.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Dividend Comparison

CAUS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CLU.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CAUS.TO Avantis CIBC U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class	1.20%	1.31%	1.32%	1.35%	1.63%	1.19%	1.66%	1.46%	1.77%	1.46%	1.63%	1.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAUS.TO and CLU.NEO in my portfolio?

CAUS.TO and CLU.NEO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CAUS.TO or CLU.NEO?

On fees, CAUS.TO is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAUS.TO or CLU.NEO?

CAUS.TO is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.

What is the main difference between CAUS.TO and CLU.NEO?

They also come from different issuers: Avantis and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for CAUS.TO and 0.72% for CLU.NEO.