CIF.TO vs. URA
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA).
CIF.TO and URA 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. URA is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Index. It was launched on Nov 4, 2010. Both CIF.TO and URA are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CIF.TO or URA.
Key characteristics
| CIF.TO | URA | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 33.91% | 10.31% |
| 1Y Return | 42.89% | 20.61% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 17.14% | 4.65% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 14.64% | 26.38% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 10.68% | 4.17% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 4.11 | 0.60 |
| Sortino Ratio | 5.97 | 1.06 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.79 | 1.12 |
| Calmar Ratio | 9.35 | 0.28 |
| Martin Ratio | 27.05 | 1.76 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.65% | 12.16% |
| Daily Std Dev | 10.81% | 35.94% |
| Max Drawdown | -42.37% | -93.54% |
| Current Drawdown | 0.00% | -67.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIF.TO and URA is 0.51, 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.
Performance
CIF.TO vs. URA - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CIF.TO achieves a 33.91% return, which is significantly higher than URA's 10.31% return. Over the past 10 years, CIF.TO has outperformed URA with an annualized return of 10.68%, while URA has yielded a comparatively lower 4.17% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CIF.TO vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIF.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CIF.TO vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). 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.
Dividends
CIF.TO vs. URA - Dividend Comparison
CIF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.84%, less than URA's 5.59% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF | 2.84% | 2.63% | 2.83% | 2.49% | 2.30% | 2.05% | 2.73% | 2.53% | 2.01% | 2.69% | 6.64% | 4.27% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 5.59% | 6.07% | 0.76% | 5.85% | 1.69% | 1.66% | 0.45% | 2.03% | 7.28% | 1.96% | 4.28% | 0.54% |
Drawdowns
CIF.TO vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIF.TO drawdown since its inception was -42.37%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIF.TO and URA. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CIF.TO vs. URA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) is 3.76%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 10.62%. This indicates that CIF.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.