CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO
CEW.TO (iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF) and HXF.TO (Global X S&P/TSX Capped Financials Index Corporate Class ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - CEW.TO tracks the Morningstar Gbl Fin Svc GR CAD while HXF.TO tracks the S&P/TSX Capped Financials Index (Total Return). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEW.TO returned 15.05%/yr vs 14.63%/yr for HXF.TO. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEW.TO charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for HXF.TO.
Performance
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEW.TO achieves a 15.99% return, which is significantly higher than HXF.TO's 10.81% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CEW.TO having a 15.05% annualized return and HXF.TO not far behind at 14.63%.
CEW.TO
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- 4.69%
- YTD
- 15.99%
- 6M
- 18.59%
- 1Y
- 44.58%
- 3Y*
- 29.74%
- 5Y*
- 17.56%
- 10Y*
- 15.05%
HXF.TO
- 1D
- -1.17%
- 1M
- 3.65%
- YTD
- 10.81%
- 6M
- 16.65%
- 1Y
- 40.51%
- 3Y*
- 29.70%
- 5Y*
- 17.03%
- 10Y*
- 14.63%
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEW.TO iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF | 15.99% | 32.58% | 29.48% | 17.04% | -6.85% | 29.26% | -0.63% | 25.38% | -12.85% | 11.88% |
HXF.TO Global X S&P/TSX Capped Financials Index Corporate Class ETF | 10.81% | 35.34% | 30.20% | 12.45% | -9.00% | 35.14% | 1.80% | 21.45% | -9.50% | 12.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEW.TO and HXF.TO is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2013 | 0.44 |
The correlation between CEW.TO and HXF.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.53 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CEW.TO
HXF.TO
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
CEW.TO
HXF.TO
Basic Materials
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Communication Services
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Consumer Cyclical
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Consumer Defensive
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Energy
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Healthcare
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Industrials
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Real Estate
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Technology
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
Utilities
CEW.TO
-
HXF.TO
-
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
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CEW.TO
HXF.TO
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF (CEW.TO) and Global X S&P/TSX Capped Financials Index Corporate Class ETF (HXF.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.
| CEW.TO | HXF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.71 | 1.65 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.29 | 5.14 | +1.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.14 | 20.92 | +2.22 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CEW.TO | HXF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.86 | 3.23 | +0.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.31 | 1.18 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.89 | 0.87 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | 0.82 | -0.23 |
Drawdowns
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEW.TO drawdown since its inception was -53.58%, which is greater than HXF.TO's maximum drawdown of -39.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEW.TO and HXF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEW.TO | HXF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.58% | -39.77% | -13.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.13% | -7.94% | +0.81% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.74% | -12.90% | +0.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.46% | -21.66% | -0.80% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -43.66% | -39.77% | -3.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.50% | -2.56% | +1.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.02% | -5.09% | -1.93% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.93% | 1.95% | -0.02% |
Volatility
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF (CEW.TO) and Global X S&P/TSX Capped Financials Index Corporate Class ETF (HXF.TO) have volatilities of 3.65% and 3.84%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEW.TO | HXF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.65% | 3.84% | -0.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.12% | 11.14% | -1.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.61% | 12.65% | -1.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.49% | 14.46% | -0.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.00% | 16.94% | +0.06% |
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEW.TO has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than HXF.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEW.TO vs. HXF.TO - Dividend Comparison
CEW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.42%, while HXF.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEW.TO iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF | 2.42% | 2.75% | 3.32% | 3.87% | 3.84% | 2.93% | 3.61% | 3.20% | 2.95% | 2.47% | 2.54% | 2.74% |
HXF.TO Global X S&P/TSX Capped Financials Index Corporate Class 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% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEW.TO and HXF.TO have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HXF.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HXF.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for CEW.TO.
CEW.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl Fin Svc GR CAD, while HXF.TO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Financials Index (Total Return). They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for CEW.TO and 0.25% for HXF.TO.
Find the right allocation for CEW.TO and HXF.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