PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CIBC Canadian Banks Covered Call ETF (CCCB.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


CCCB.TO

1D
1.24%
1M
4.27%
YTD
15.74%
6M
20.61%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CSBG.NEO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
0.00%
6M
0.00%
1Y
0.00%
3Y*
0.80%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison


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

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CIBC Canadian Banks Covered Call ETF (CCCB.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.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.

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CCCB.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

4.21

1.08

+3.13

Drawdowns

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCCB.TO drawdown since its inception was -7.92%, which is greater than CSBG.NEO's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCCB.TO and CSBG.NEO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CCCB.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.92%

0.00%

-7.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

0.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

0.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.35%

0.00%

-1.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.04%

0.00%

-1.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.00%

Volatility

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CCCB.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.06%

0.00%

+13.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.06%

1.27%

+11.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.06%

1.27%

+11.79%

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCCB.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than CSBG.NEO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

CCCB.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Dividend Comparison

CCCB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.97%, while CSBG.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
CCCB.TO
CIBC Canadian Banks Covered Call ETF
3.97%1.93%0.00%0.00%0.00%
CSBG.NEO
CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF
0.00%0.00%1.16%1.21%1.66%

Frequently Asked Questions


On fees, CCCB.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CCCB.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

CCCB.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while CSBG.NEO is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for CCCB.TO and 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CCCB.TO and CSBG.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