CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO
CIF.TO (iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF) and ZSP.TO (BMO 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 ZSP.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 13.54%/yr vs 16.12%/yr for ZSP.TO. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CIF.TO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for ZSP.TO.
Performance
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIF.TO achieves a 25.11% return, which is significantly higher than ZSP.TO's 11.01% return. Over the past 10 years, CIF.TO has underperformed ZSP.TO with an annualized return of 13.54%, while ZSP.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 16.12% annualized return.
CIF.TO
- 1D
- 1.09%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 25.11%
- 6M
- 18.12%
- 1Y
- 34.53%
- 3Y*
- 24.98%
- 5Y*
- 18.36%
- 10Y*
- 13.54%
ZSP.TO
- 1D
- 0.74%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 11.01%
- 6M
- 11.06%
- 1Y
- 29.16%
- 3Y*
- 22.66%
- 5Y*
- 16.33%
- 10Y*
- 16.12%
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF | 25.11% | 14.57% | 25.83% | 14.99% | 6.22% | 18.14% | -0.31% | 24.93% | -5.12% | 2.73% |
ZSP.TO BMO S&P 500 Index ETF | 11.01% | 12.36% | 35.07% | 23.30% | -12.68% | 27.54% | 15.61% | 24.69% | 3.28% | 13.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIF.TO and ZSP.TO is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2012 | 0.55 |
The correlation between CIF.TO and ZSP.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CIF.TO
ZSP.TO
Utilities
Industrials
Energy
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
CIF.TO
ZSP.TO
Industrials
CIF.TO
ZSP.TO
Energy
CIF.TO
ZSP.TO
Technology
CIF.TO
ZSP.TO
Consumer Cyclical
CIF.TO
ZSP.TO
Basic Materials
CIF.TO
-
ZSP.TO
Communication Services
CIF.TO
-
ZSP.TO
Consumer Defensive
CIF.TO
-
ZSP.TO
Financial Services
CIF.TO
-
ZSP.TO
Healthcare
CIF.TO
-
ZSP.TO
Real Estate
CIF.TO
-
ZSP.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. ZSP.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CIF.TO
ZSP.TO
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) and BMO S&P 500 Index ETF (ZSP.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 | ZSP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.43 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.64 | 3.22 | +0.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.99 | 12.00 | +0.99 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIF.TO drawdown since its inception was -45.41%, which is greater than ZSP.TO's maximum drawdown of -26.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIF.TO and ZSP.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIF.TO | ZSP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.41% | -26.94% | -18.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.49% | -8.61% | -0.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.33% | -18.95% | -1.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.33% | -22.25% | +1.92% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.41% | -26.94% | -18.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.94% | -1.47% | +0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.75% | -3.34% | -6.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.65% | 2.31% | +0.34% |
Volatility
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.07% compared to BMO S&P 500 Index ETF (ZSP.TO) at 4.54%. This indicates that CIF.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZSP.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIF.TO | ZSP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.07% | 4.54% | +0.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.85% | 9.31% | +3.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.50% | 11.94% | +3.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.16% | 15.03% | +0.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.97% | 16.39% | +9.58% |
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIF.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than ZSP.TO's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIF.TO vs. ZSP.TO - Dividend Comparison
CIF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.82%, more than ZSP.TO's 0.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF | 1.82% | 2.14% | 3.13% | 2.63% | 2.83% | 2.55% | 2.37% | 2.11% | 2.82% | 2.64% | 2.09% | 2.81% |
ZSP.TO BMO S&P 500 Index ETF | 0.76% | 0.82% | 0.94% | 1.33% | 1.44% | 1.15% | 1.45% | 1.48% | 1.68% | 1.68% | 2.23% | 1.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CIF.TO and ZSP.TO have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZSP.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZSP.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CIF.TO.
CIF.TO is categorized as Energy Equities, while ZSP.TO is S&P 500. CIF.TO tracks Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index, while ZSP.TO tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CIF.TO and 0.09% for ZSP.TO.
Find the right allocation for CIF.TO and ZSP.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