PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO).

CIF.TO and CWW.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CIF.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index. It was launched on Aug 27, 2008. CWW.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD. It was launched on Jun 4, 2007. Both CIF.TO and CWW.TO are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CIF.TO
iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF		15.08%14.45%25.40%14.65%5.90%17.73%-0.62%23.55%-5.46%2.34%
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		3.08%10.11%2.99%11.71%-16.52%27.08%12.93%26.85%-2.69%17.91%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIF.TO achieves a 15.08% return, which is significantly higher than CWW.TO's 3.08% return. Over the past 10 years, CIF.TO has outperformed CWW.TO with an annualized return of 12.47%, while CWW.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 9.22% annualized return.

CIF.TO

1D
2.07%
1M
-1.29%
YTD
15.08%
6M
9.29%
1Y
34.93%
3Y*
22.51%
5Y*
17.08%
10Y*
12.47%

CWW.TO

1D
1.71%
1M
-5.36%
YTD
3.08%
6M
-1.09%
1Y
9.79%
3Y*
7.13%
5Y*
5.73%
10Y*
9.22%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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 Infrastructure Index ETF

iShares Global Water Index ETF

Often compared with CIF.TO:
CIF.TO vs. VFV.TOCIF.TO vs. MLPP.LCIF.TO vs. ZQQ.TOCIF.TO vs. VGTCIF.TO vs. URACIF.TO vs. FXAIXCIF.TO vs. XDIV.TO
Often compared with CWW.TO:
CWW.TO vs. FIWCWW.TO vs. COW.TOCWW.TO vs. KBWBCWW.TO vs. VFV.TOCWW.TO vs. VCRCWW.TO vs. ENFRCWW.TO vs. XAW.TO

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIF.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than CWW.TO's 0.66% expense ratio.

CIF.TO
iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF

Return for Risk

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CIF.TO
CIF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
CWW.TO
CWW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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.

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.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.

CIF.TOCWW.TODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.01

0.64

+1.36

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.53

1.00

+1.53

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.12

+0.27

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.20

1.01

+2.19

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

11.47

3.08

+8.39

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

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is higher than the CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIF.TO and CWW.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CIF.TOCWW.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.01

0.64

+1.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.20

0.38

+0.82

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.76

0.56

+0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.51

0.39

+0.12

Correlation

The correlation between CIF.TO and CWW.TO is 0.49, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Dividend Comparison

CIF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, more than CWW.TO's 1.52% yield.

TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CIF.TO
iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF		1.92%2.05%2.84%2.36%2.53%2.24%2.06%1.83%2.45%2.27%1.81%2.41%
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		1.52%1.34%1.05%1.17%1.28%2.62%1.11%1.24%2.95%1.41%1.60%1.16%

Drawdowns

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIF.TO drawdown since its inception was -42.37%, smaller than the maximum CWW.TO drawdown of -46.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIF.TO and CWW.TO.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

CIF.TOCWW.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.37%

-46.54%

+4.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.10%

-10.24%

-0.86%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.40%

-31.05%

+10.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.37%

-31.05%

-11.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.13%

-5.93%

+3.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.70%

-9.50%

+3.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.10%

3.35%

-0.25%

Volatility

CIF.TO vs. CWW.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) have volatilities of 6.40% and 6.24%, 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 graphics...

Volatility by Period

CIF.TOCWW.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.40%

6.24%

+0.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.05%

10.97%

+1.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.49%

15.26%

+2.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.32%

15.35%

-1.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.58%

16.49%

+0.09%