CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CEQP.TO (CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF) and GGRO.TO (iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEQP.TO charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for GGRO.TO.

Performance

CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF (CEQP.TO) and iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio (GGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CEQP.TO

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 5.46%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GGRO.TO

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 6.33%
• YTD: 11.48%
• 6M: 8.73%
• 1Y: 22.29%
• 3Y*: 18.93%
• 5Y*: 11.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CEQP.TO CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF	7.21%
GGRO.TO iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio	9.36%

Correlation

The correlation between CEQP.TO and GGRO.TO is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2026	0.11

Return for Risk

CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GGRO.TO

GGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 59
GGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
GGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
GGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 58
GGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
GGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF (CEQP.TO) and iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio (GGRO.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.

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

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CEQP.TO	GGRO.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.88	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.96	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.37	1.07	+0.30

Drawdowns

CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEQP.TO drawdown since its inception was -8.33%, smaller than the maximum GGRO.TO drawdown of -22.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEQP.TO and GGRO.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEQP.TO	GGRO.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.33%	-22.13%	+13.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-7.74%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.78%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.66%	+0.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.89%	-4.96%	+3.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.92%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CEQP.TO	GGRO.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.84%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	9.82%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.40%	11.91%	+4.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.40%	11.76%	+4.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.40%	11.57%	+4.83%

CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEQP.TO has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than GGRO.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEQP.TO vs. GGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

CEQP.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than GGRO.TO's 1.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEQP.TO CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GGRO.TO iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio	1.38%	1.51%	1.62%	1.89%	1.69%	1.43%	0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEQP.TO and GGRO.TO in my portfolio?

CEQP.TO and GGRO.TO have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CEQP.TO or GGRO.TO?

On fees, GGRO.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEQP.TO or GGRO.TO?

GGRO.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CEQP.TO.

What is the main difference between CEQP.TO and GGRO.TO?

They also come from different issuers: CI and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CEQP.TO and 0.25% for GGRO.TO.