PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGR.TO (iShares Global Real Estate Index ETF) and XEQT.TO (iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio) are both exchange-traded funds - CGR.TO is a REIT fund tracking the Morningstar DM REIT NR CAD, while XEQT.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by iShares. CGR.TO is passively managed, while XEQT.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CGR.TO returned 3.60%/yr vs 13.72%/yr for XEQT.TO. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGR.TO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XEQT.TO.

Performance

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Real Estate Index ETF (CGR.TO) and iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio (XEQT.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGR.TO achieves a 7.84% return, which is significantly lower than XEQT.TO's 12.29% return.

CGR.TO

1D
-0.12%
1M
-0.61%
YTD
7.84%
6M
6.09%
1Y
9.02%
3Y*
9.97%
5Y*
3.60%
10Y*
3.96%

XEQT.TO

1D
-0.56%
1M
5.98%
YTD
12.29%
6M
11.20%
1Y
29.24%
3Y*
21.78%
5Y*
13.72%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
CGR.TO
iShares Global Real Estate Index ETF		7.84%2.56%9.99%7.58%-21.75%28.98%-9.40%3.12%
XEQT.TO
iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio		12.29%19.47%24.36%17.25%-11.01%18.94%11.82%9.89%

Correlation

The correlation between CGR.TO and XEQT.TO is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.48

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

0.51

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2019

0.55

The correlation between CGR.TO and XEQT.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CGR.TO
XEQT.TO

Real Estate

100.0%
2.2%

Financial Services

0.0%
20.3%

Basic Materials

-

7.3%

Communication Services

-

6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

-

7.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.4%

Energy

-

7.2%

Healthcare

-

6.6%

Industrials

-

12.1%

Technology

-

22.9%

Utilities

-

2.8%

Real Estate

CGR.TO
100.0%
XEQT.TO
2.2%

Financial Services

CGR.TO
0.0%
XEQT.TO
20.3%

Basic Materials

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
7.3%

Communication Services

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
7.8%

Consumer Defensive

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
4.4%

Energy

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
7.2%

Healthcare

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
6.6%

Industrials

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
12.1%

Technology

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
22.9%

Utilities

CGR.TO

-

XEQT.TO
2.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Global Real Estate Index ETF

iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio

Often compared with CGR.TO:
CGR.TO vs. XRE.TOCGR.TO vs. REETCGR.TO vs. RS.TOCGR.TO vs. VFV.TOCGR.TO vs. ^GSPCCGR.TO vs. VCRCGR.TO vs. VNQI
Often compared with XEQT.TO:
XEQT.TO vs. VFV.TOXEQT.TO vs. VEQT.TOXEQT.TO vs. XGRO.TOXEQT.TO vs. ZEQT.TOXEQT.TO vs. VGRO.TOXEQT.TO vs. XEI.TOXEQT.TO vs. VOO

Return for Risk

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CGR.TO
CGR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
CGR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
CGR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank
XEQT.TO
XEQT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
XEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEQT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEQT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
XEQT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEQT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Real Estate Index ETF (CGR.TO) and iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio (XEQT.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.

CGR.TOXEQT.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.72
2.53

-1.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.08
3.49

-2.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.47

-0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.95

3.56

-2.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.03

15.50

-12.48

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGR.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the XEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGR.TO and XEQT.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CGR.TOXEQT.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.72

2.53

-1.80

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

1.05

-0.81

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.24

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.95

-0.67

Drawdowns

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGR.TO drawdown since its inception was -52.90%, which is greater than XEQT.TO's maximum drawdown of -29.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGR.TO and XEQT.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CGR.TOXEQT.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.90%

-29.74%

-23.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.55%

-8.25%

-1.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.40%

-15.08%

+0.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.76%

-19.56%

-9.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.71%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.99%

-0.56%

-2.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.98%

-4.11%

-5.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.99%

1.89%

+1.10%

Volatility

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Real Estate Index ETF (CGR.TO) and iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio (XEQT.TO) have volatilities of 3.77% and 3.70%, 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

CGR.TOXEQT.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.77%

3.70%

+0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.87%

9.38%

+0.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.51%

11.63%

+0.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.01%

13.12%

+1.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.56%

15.56%

+1.00%

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGR.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than XEQT.TO's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGR.TO vs. XEQT.TO - Dividend Comparison

CGR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%, more than XEQT.TO's 1.48% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGR.TO
iShares Global Real Estate Index ETF		2.33%2.51%2.52%2.59%2.40%1.70%2.22%2.10%2.54%4.25%2.83%2.97%
XEQT.TO
iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio		1.48%1.66%2.01%2.07%2.12%1.64%1.66%1.19%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CGR.TO and XEQT.TO have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XEQT.TO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEQT.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CGR.TO.

CGR.TO is categorized as REIT, while XEQT.TO is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CGR.TO and 0.20% for XEQT.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGR.TO and XEQT.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