CIF.TO vs. NRGY.TO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CIF.TO (iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF) and NRGY.TO (Global X Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - CIF.TO tracks the Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index while NRGY.TO tracks the Mirae Asset Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CIF.TO returned 37.55% vs 44.35% for NRGY.TO. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CIF.TO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for NRGY.TO.

Performance

CIF.TO vs. NRGY.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 Global X Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index ETF (NRGY.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIF.TO achieves a 28.46% return, which is significantly lower than NRGY.TO's 32.04% return.

CIF.TO

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 4.41%
• YTD: 28.46%
• 6M: 21.72%
• 1Y: 37.55%
• 3Y*: 27.25%
• 5Y*: 19.05%
• 10Y*: 13.60%

NRGY.TO

• 1D: 1.13%
• 1M: -5.98%
• YTD: 32.04%
• 6M: 33.33%
• 1Y: 44.35%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF	28.46%	14.57%	-5.25%
NRGY.TO Global X Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index ETF	32.04%	14.36%	-2.64%

Correlation

The correlation between CIF.TO and NRGY.TO is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2024	0.30

The correlation between CIF.TO and NRGY.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (1 year) to 0.30 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CIF.TO vs. NRGY.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CIF.TO	NRGY.TO
Utilities	44.9%	-
Industrials	34.6%	-
Energy	19.8%	100.0%
Technology	0.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CIF.TO vs. NRGY.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: 79
CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
CIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
CIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 79
CIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

NRGY.TO

NRGY.TO Risk / Return Rank: 84
NRGY.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
NRGY.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
NRGY.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 81
NRGY.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
NRGY.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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. NRGY.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and Global X Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index ETF (NRGY.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.

	CIF.TO	NRGY.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.42	2.60	-0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.23	3.38	-0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.44	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.97	4.74	-0.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.20	14.81	-0.61

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

The current CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the NRGY.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIF.TO and NRGY.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.

Drawdowns

CIF.TO vs. NRGY.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIF.TO drawdown since its inception was -45.41%, which is greater than NRGY.TO's maximum drawdown of -16.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIF.TO and NRGY.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CIF.TO	NRGY.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.41%	-16.59%	-28.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.49%	-9.49%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.38%	-6.86%	+6.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.74%	-3.63%	-6.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.65%	3.16%	-0.51%

Volatility

CIF.TO vs. NRGY.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) is 4.77%, while Global X Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index ETF (NRGY.TO) has a volatility of 6.29%. This indicates that CIF.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NRGY.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CIF.TO	NRGY.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.77%	6.29%	-1.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.80%	14.57%	-1.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.62%	17.47%	-1.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.16%	19.66%	-4.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.98%	19.66%	+6.32%

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

CIF.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than NRGY.TO's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

CIF.TO vs. NRGY.TO - Dividend Comparison

CIF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, less than NRGY.TO's 3.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF	1.77%	2.14%	3.13%	2.63%	2.83%	2.55%	2.37%	2.11%	2.82%	2.64%	2.09%	2.81%
NRGY.TO Global X Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index ETF	3.20%	3.87%	0.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CIF.TO and NRGY.TO in my portfolio?

CIF.TO and NRGY.TO have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CIF.TO or NRGY.TO?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, CIF.TO or NRGY.TO?

NRGY.TO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CIF.TO.

What is the main difference between CIF.TO and NRGY.TO?

CIF.TO tracks Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index, while NRGY.TO tracks Mirae Asset Equal Weight Canadian Oil & Gas Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CIF.TO and 0.49% for NRGY.TO.