CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO
CIF.TO (iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF) and XUS.TO (iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CIF.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index, while XUS.TO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CIF.TO returned 12.99%/yr vs 15.98%/yr for XUS.TO. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CIF.TO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for XUS.TO.
Performance
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIF.TO achieves a 25.20% return, which is significantly higher than XUS.TO's 12.21% return. Over the past 10 years, CIF.TO has underperformed XUS.TO with an annualized return of 12.99%, while XUS.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 15.98% annualized return.
CIF.TO
- 1D
- 1.03%
- 1M
- 3.28%
- YTD
- 25.20%
- 6M
- 16.23%
- 1Y
- 35.22%
- 3Y*
- 25.10%
- 5Y*
- 18.52%
- 10Y*
- 12.99%
XUS.TO
- 1D
- -0.31%
- 1M
- 7.22%
- YTD
- 12.21%
- 6M
- 10.39%
- 1Y
- 29.30%
- 3Y*
- 23.52%
- 5Y*
- 16.78%
- 10Y*
- 15.98%
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF | 25.20% | 14.45% | 25.40% | 14.65% | 5.90% | 17.73% | -0.62% | 23.55% | -5.46% | 2.34% |
XUS.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF | 12.21% | 12.19% | 35.16% | 23.31% | -12.59% | 27.20% | 15.56% | 24.57% | 3.31% | 13.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIF.TO and XUS.TO is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2013 | 0.52 |
The correlation between CIF.TO and XUS.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CIF.TO
XUS.TO
Utilities
Industrials
Energy
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
CIF.TO
XUS.TO
Industrials
CIF.TO
XUS.TO
Energy
CIF.TO
XUS.TO
Technology
CIF.TO
XUS.TO
Consumer Cyclical
CIF.TO
XUS.TO
Basic Materials
CIF.TO
-
XUS.TO
Communication Services
CIF.TO
-
XUS.TO
Consumer Defensive
CIF.TO
-
XUS.TO
Financial Services
CIF.TO
-
XUS.TO
Healthcare
CIF.TO
-
XUS.TO
Real Estate
CIF.TO
-
XUS.TO
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CIF.TO
XUS.TO
CIF.TO vs. XUS.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 Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.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.TO | XUS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.47 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.72 | 3.41 | +0.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.46 | 12.94 | +0.52 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CIF.TO | XUS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.33 | 2.55 | -0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.28 | 1.13 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.78 | 0.98 | -0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 1.08 | -0.54 |
Drawdowns
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIF.TO drawdown since its inception was -42.37%, which is greater than XUS.TO's maximum drawdown of -27.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIF.TO and XUS.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIF.TO | XUS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.37% | -27.23% | -15.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.50% | -8.63% | -0.87% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.40% | -18.96% | -1.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.40% | -21.85% | +1.45% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.37% | -27.23% | -15.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.76% | -0.31% | -0.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.66% | -3.46% | -2.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.63% | 2.27% | +0.36% |
Volatility
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.85% compared to iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) at 3.19%. This indicates that CIF.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XUS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIF.TO | XUS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.85% | 3.19% | +2.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.44% | 8.66% | +3.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.23% | 11.58% | +3.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.56% | 14.92% | -0.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.69% | 16.48% | +0.21% |
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIF.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than XUS.TO's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIF.TO vs. XUS.TO - Dividend Comparison
CIF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, more than XUS.TO's 1.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF | 1.77% | 2.05% | 2.84% | 2.36% | 2.53% | 2.24% | 2.06% | 1.83% | 2.45% | 2.27% | 1.81% | 2.41% |
XUS.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF | 1.12% | 1.26% | 1.03% | 1.22% | 1.38% | 0.99% | 1.35% | 2.02% | 1.77% | 1.48% | 1.66% | 1.70% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CIF.TO and XUS.TO have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XUS.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XUS.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CIF.TO.
CIF.TO is categorized as Energy Equities, while XUS.TO is S&P 500. CIF.TO tracks Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index, while XUS.TO tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CIF.TO and 0.09% for XUS.TO.
Find the right allocation for CIF.TO and XUS.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