CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO
CEQP.TO (CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF) and MGRW.TO (Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CEQP.TO
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- 5.46%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MGRW.TO
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 4.58%
- YTD
- 9.90%
- 6M
- 9.89%
- 1Y
- 25.85%
- 3Y*
- 19.61%
- 5Y*
- 12.14%
- 10Y*
- —
CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CEQP.TO CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF | 7.21% |
MGRW.TO Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF | 7.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEQP.TO and MGRW.TO is 0.23, 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 | 0.23 |
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
CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CEQP.TO
MGRW.TO
CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF (CEQP.TO) and Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF (MGRW.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.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CEQP.TO | MGRW.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.64 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.37 | 1.25 | +0.12 |
Drawdowns
CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEQP.TO drawdown since its inception was -8.33%, smaller than the maximum MGRW.TO drawdown of -17.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEQP.TO and MGRW.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEQP.TO | MGRW.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.33% | -17.20% | +8.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -6.72% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -12.17% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.20% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.89% | -3.37% | +1.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.63% | — |
Volatility
CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEQP.TO | MGRW.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.39% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 8.09% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.40% | 9.87% | +6.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.40% | 10.68% | +5.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.40% | 10.49% | +5.91% |
Dividends
CEQP.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Dividend Comparison
CEQP.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than MGRW.TO's 1.73% 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% |
MGRW.TO Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF | 1.73% | 1.84% | 1.93% | 2.28% | 2.44% | 1.77% | 0.79% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEQP.TO and MGRW.TO have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
They also come from different issuers: CI and Mackenzie.
Find the right allocation for CEQP.TO and MGRW.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