PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CIE.NEO (iShares International Fundamental Common Class) and XMY.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - CIE.NEO tracks the FTSE RAFI Developed ex US 1000 Index while XMY.TO tracks the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CIE.NEO returned 15.50%/yr vs 6.28%/yr for XMY.TO. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CIE.NEO charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for XMY.TO.

Performance

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares International Fundamental Common Class (CIE.NEO) and iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMY.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIE.NEO achieves a 17.83% return, which is significantly higher than XMY.TO's 2.30% return.

CIE.NEO

1D
-0.39%
1M
6.26%
YTD
17.83%
6M
19.92%
1Y
39.49%
3Y*
25.09%
5Y*
15.50%
10Y*
11.89%

XMY.TO

1D
0.12%
1M
1.84%
YTD
2.30%
6M
2.49%
1Y
5.25%
3Y*
10.11%
5Y*
6.28%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CIE.NEO
iShares International Fundamental Common Class		17.83%34.92%12.83%15.59%-2.83%14.42%1.33%11.29%-8.19%16.74%
XMY.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.30%9.22%13.48%7.15%-7.59%16.37%-1.31%19.42%-2.11%15.60%

Correlation

The correlation between CIE.NEO and XMY.TO is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.25

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

0.23

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

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016

0.32

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares International Fundamental Common Class

iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with CIE.NEO:
CIE.NEO vs. PXFCIE.NEO vs. VGG.TOCIE.NEO vs. SPYCIE.NEO vs. DFIVCIE.NEO vs. FCCM.NEOCIE.NEO vs. XMW.TOCIE.NEO vs. XEQT.TO
Often compared with XMY.TO:
XMY.TO vs. XMU.TOXMY.TO vs. XMV.TOXMY.TO vs. XML.TOXMY.TO vs. CAGE.TOXMY.TO vs. FCIN.NEOXMY.TO vs. XEQT.TOXMY.TO vs. VMO.TO

Return for Risk

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CIE.NEO
CIE.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
CIE.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank
XMY.TO
XMY.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
XMY.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMY.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMY.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
XMY.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMY.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares International Fundamental Common Class (CIE.NEO) and iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMY.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.

CIE.NEOXMY.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.85
0.72

+2.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.90
1.05

+2.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.54

1.13

+0.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.57

1.02

+2.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.78

2.95

+11.83

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

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIE.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.85, which is higher than the XMY.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIE.NEO and XMY.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

CIE.NEOXMY.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.85

0.72

+2.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.13

0.65

+0.48

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.63

-0.19

Drawdowns

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIE.NEO drawdown since its inception was -40.08%, which is greater than XMY.TO's maximum drawdown of -29.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIE.NEO and XMY.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CIE.NEOXMY.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.08%

-29.00%

-11.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.10%

-5.35%

-5.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.44%

-8.10%

-7.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.55%

-13.89%

-6.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.08%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.39%

-2.20%

+1.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.13%

-3.30%

-3.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.68%

1.85%

+0.83%

Volatility

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares International Fundamental Common Class (CIE.NEO) has a higher volatility of 4.85% compared to iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMY.TO) at 1.98%. This indicates that CIE.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMY.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CIE.NEOXMY.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.85%

1.98%

+2.87%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.56%

5.92%

+5.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.95%

7.58%

+6.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.85%

9.74%

+4.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.19%

11.48%

+6.71%

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIE.NEO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than XMY.TO's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

CIE.NEO vs. XMY.TO - Dividend Comparison

CIE.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, more than XMY.TO's 1.86% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CIE.NEO
iShares International Fundamental Common Class		2.12%2.53%2.82%3.08%3.32%2.89%2.15%3.63%3.12%2.67%2.80%2.44%
XMY.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		1.86%1.90%1.91%1.90%1.71%1.40%1.37%2.16%1.45%1.58%2.07%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CIE.NEO and XMY.TO have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMY.TO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMY.TO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CIE.NEO.

CIE.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Developed ex US 1000 Index, while XMY.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for CIE.NEO and 0.49% for XMY.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CIE.NEO and XMY.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