CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CCOM.TO (CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units) and XCLN.TO (iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CCOM.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Auspice Broad Commodity Excess Return Index, while XCLN.TO is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CCOM.TO returned 6.60%/yr vs 8.97%/yr for XCLN.TO. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CCOM.TO charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XCLN.TO.

Performance

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.TO) and iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF (XCLN.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CCOM.TO achieves a 14.12% return, which is significantly lower than XCLN.TO's 43.07% return.

CCOM.TO

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: -1.57%
• YTD: 14.12%
• 6M: 13.88%
• 1Y: 21.03%
• 3Y*: 6.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XCLN.TO

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: 14.72%
• YTD: 43.07%
• 6M: 37.48%
• 1Y: 84.30%
• 3Y*: 8.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CCOM.TO CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units	14.12%	6.96%	5.90%	-2.46%	1.40%
XCLN.TO iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF	43.07%	37.41%	-19.86%	-21.98%	0.56%

Correlation

The correlation between CCOM.TO and XCLN.TO is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2022	0.12

Return for Risk

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CCOM.TO

CCOM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 70
CCOM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
CCOM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
CCOM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 67
CCOM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
CCOM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 75

XCLN.TO

XCLN.TO Risk / Return Rank: 88
XCLN.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
XCLN.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
XCLN.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
XCLN.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
XCLN.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.TO) and iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF (XCLN.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.

	CCOM.TO	XCLN.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	3.15	-1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.76	3.78	-1.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.49	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.75	7.00	-2.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.22	19.91	-5.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCOM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is lower than the XCLN.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCOM.TO and XCLN.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CCOM.TO	XCLN.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.11	3.15	-1.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.82	0.33	+0.49

Drawdowns

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCOM.TO drawdown since its inception was -9.79%, smaller than the maximum XCLN.TO drawdown of -49.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCOM.TO and XCLN.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CCOM.TO	XCLN.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.79%	-49.29%	+39.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.45%	-12.10%	+7.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.18%	-39.31%	+31.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.45%	-0.98%	-3.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.96%	-25.54%	+22.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.48%	4.25%	-2.77%

Volatility

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.TO) is 4.71%, while iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF (XCLN.TO) has a volatility of 10.50%. This indicates that CCOM.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCLN.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CCOM.TO	XCLN.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.71%	10.50%	-5.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.36%	20.24%	-11.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.02%	26.95%	-16.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.42%	25.50%	-17.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.42%	25.50%	-17.08%

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCOM.TO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than XCLN.TO's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CCOM.TO vs. XCLN.TO - Dividend Comparison

CCOM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.35%, more than XCLN.TO's 1.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CCOM.TO CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units	7.35%	3.48%	6.99%	4.21%	0.00%
XCLN.TO iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF	1.04%	1.49%	1.24%	1.15%	0.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CCOM.TO and XCLN.TO in my portfolio?

CCOM.TO and XCLN.TO have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CCOM.TO or XCLN.TO?

On fees, XCLN.TO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CCOM.TO or XCLN.TO?

XCLN.TO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CCOM.TO.

What is the main difference between CCOM.TO and XCLN.TO?

CCOM.TO is categorized as Commodities, while XCLN.TO is Alternative Energy Equities. CCOM.TO tracks Auspice Broad Commodity Excess Return Index, while XCLN.TO tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: CI and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for CCOM.TO and 0.35% for XCLN.TO.