PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

CEW.TO (iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF) and HXQ.TO (Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CEW.TO is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Gbl Fin Svc GR CAD, while HXQ.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEW.TO returned 16.02%/yr vs 22.27%/yr for HXQ.TO. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEW.TO charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for HXQ.TO.

Performance

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF (CEW.TO) and Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF (HXQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEW.TO achieves a 22.02% return, which is significantly higher than HXQ.TO's 19.67% return. Over the past 10 years, CEW.TO has underperformed HXQ.TO with an annualized return of 16.02%, while HXQ.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 22.27% annualized return.

CEW.TO

1D
1.03%
1M
9.08%
YTD
22.02%
6M
20.13%
1Y
51.89%
3Y*
31.90%
5Y*
19.14%
10Y*
16.02%

HXQ.TO

1D
0.78%
1M
3.00%
YTD
19.67%
6M
19.59%
1Y
39.46%
3Y*
28.29%
5Y*
19.92%
10Y*
22.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CEW.TO
iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF		22.02%32.70%29.62%17.18%-6.76%29.51%-0.38%25.64%-12.71%12.06%
HXQ.TO
Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF		19.67%15.05%35.98%51.16%-27.84%26.20%45.58%32.26%6.71%23.12%

Correlation

The correlation between CEW.TO and HXQ.TO is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.38

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.40

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2016

0.35

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CEW.TO
HXQ.TO

Financial Services

100.0%
0.3%

Basic Materials

-

1.0%

Communication Services

-

15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

-

13.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.4%

Energy

-

0.5%

Healthcare

-

4.4%

Industrials

-

3.1%

Real Estate

-

0.2%

Technology

-

55.9%

Utilities

-

1.4%

Financial Services

CEW.TO
100.0%
HXQ.TO
0.3%

Basic Materials

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
1.0%

Communication Services

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
13.2%

Consumer Defensive

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
4.4%

Energy

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
0.5%

Healthcare

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
4.4%

Industrials

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
3.1%

Real Estate

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
0.2%

Technology

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
55.9%

Utilities

CEW.TO

-

HXQ.TO
1.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF

Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF

Often compared with CEW.TO:
CEW.TO vs. XFN.TOCEW.TO vs. BMOCEW.TO vs. XDIV.TOCEW.TO vs. TEC.TOCEW.TO vs. VFV.TOCEW.TO vs. RY.TOCEW.TO vs. SPY
Often compared with HXQ.TO:
HXQ.TO vs. QQC.TOHXQ.TO vs. XQQ.TOHXQ.TO vs. VFV.TOHXQ.TO vs. QQQHXQ.TO vs. HXS.TOHXQ.TO vs. ZNQ.TOHXQ.TO vs. QQC-F.TO

Return for Risk

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CEW.TO
CEW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
CEW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
CEW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO
HXQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
HXQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
HXQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.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 Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF (HXQ.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

CEW.TOHXQ.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
4.44
2.37

+2.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
5.95
3.07

+2.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.82

1.42

+0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.32

3.19

+4.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

27.01

10.12

+16.89

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEW.TO Sharpe Ratio is 4.44, which is higher than the HXQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEW.TO and HXQ.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.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEW.TO drawdown since its inception was -53.50%, which is greater than HXQ.TO's maximum drawdown of -31.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEW.TO and HXQ.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CEW.TOHXQ.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.50%

-31.60%

-21.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.13%

-12.43%

+5.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.72%

-22.58%

+9.86%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.41%

-31.60%

+9.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.66%

-31.60%

-12.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-2.58%

+2.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.94%

-5.74%

-1.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.93%

3.91%

-1.98%

Volatility

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF (CEW.TO) is 3.79%, while Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF (HXQ.TO) has a volatility of 7.27%. This indicates that CEW.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HXQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CEW.TOHXQ.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.79%

7.27%

-3.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.17%

13.32%

-3.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.74%

16.70%

-4.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.57%

20.92%

-7.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.06%

20.92%

-3.86%

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEW.TO has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than HXQ.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEW.TO vs. HXQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

CEW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, while HXQ.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CEW.TO
iShares Equal Weight Banc & Lifeco ETF		2.34%2.82%3.41%3.98%3.95%3.10%3.83%3.39%3.13%2.62%2.70%2.91%
HXQ.TO
Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index 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 HXQ.TO have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

HXQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for CEW.TO.

CEW.TO is categorized as Financials Equities, while HXQ.TO is Nasdaq-100. CEW.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl Fin Svc GR CAD, while HXQ.TO tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Horizons. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for CEW.TO and 0.25% for HXQ.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CEW.TO and HXQ.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