CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO
CLF.TO (iShares 1-5 Year Laddered Government Bond Index ETF) and HUC.TO (Global X Crude Oil ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLF.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund tracking the Morningstar Can 1-5Y Core Bd GR CAD, while HUC.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CLF.TO returned 1.81%/yr vs 8.13%/yr for HUC.TO. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. CLF.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for HUC.TO.
Performance
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLF.TO achieves a 0.91% return, which is significantly lower than HUC.TO's 42.05% return. Over the past 10 years, CLF.TO has underperformed HUC.TO with an annualized return of 1.81%, while HUC.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 8.13% annualized return.
CLF.TO
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 0.73%
- YTD
- 0.91%
- 6M
- 0.70%
- 1Y
- 2.48%
- 3Y*
- 4.19%
- 5Y*
- 1.74%
- 10Y*
- 1.81%
HUC.TO
- 1D
- -2.03%
- 1M
- -1.85%
- YTD
- 42.05%
- 6M
- 37.99%
- 1Y
- 37.42%
- 3Y*
- 11.54%
- 5Y*
- 12.86%
- 10Y*
- 8.13%
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLF.TO iShares 1-5 Year Laddered Government Bond Index ETF | 0.91% | 3.36% | 4.82% | 4.58% | -3.98% | -1.27% | 5.53% | 3.97% | 1.68% | -0.49% |
HUC.TO Global X Crude Oil ETF | 42.05% | -13.63% | 7.23% | -2.89% | 26.25% | 57.81% | -21.10% | 19.75% | -11.68% | -3.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLF.TO and HUC.TO is -0.40, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.18 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2009 | -0.16 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between CLF.TO and HUC.TO has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.16 to -0.40, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CLF.TO
HUC.TO
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares 1-5 Year Laddered Government Bond Index ETF (CLF.TO) and Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.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.
| CLF.TO | HUC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.27 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.80 | 2.32 | -0.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.18 | 4.59 | +0.59 |
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
| CLF.TO | HUC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.22 | 1.48 | -0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 | 0.46 | +0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 | 0.28 | +0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.72 | 0.13 | +0.59 |
Drawdowns
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLF.TO drawdown since its inception was -6.91%, smaller than the maximum HUC.TO drawdown of -76.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLF.TO and HUC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLF.TO | HUC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.91% | -76.99% | +70.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.38% | -16.20% | +14.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.42% | -23.83% | +22.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -6.80% | -30.83% | +24.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -6.91% | -61.56% | +54.65% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.26% | -4.77% | +4.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.08% | -34.60% | +33.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.48% | 8.18% | -7.70% |
Volatility
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares 1-5 Year Laddered Government Bond Index ETF (CLF.TO) is 0.72%, while Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) has a volatility of 11.36%. This indicates that CLF.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HUC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLF.TO | HUC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.72% | 11.36% | -10.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.62% | 21.24% | -19.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.04% | 25.42% | -23.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.98% | 27.87% | -24.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.37% | 29.04% | -25.67% |
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLF.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than HUC.TO's 1.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLF.TO vs. HUC.TO - Dividend Comparison
CLF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, while HUC.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLF.TO iShares 1-5 Year Laddered Government Bond Index ETF | 2.25% | 2.22% | 2.22% | 2.23% | 2.10% | 1.98% | 2.81% | 3.93% | 2.67% | 2.91% | 3.12% | 3.29% |
HUC.TO Global X Crude Oil ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLF.TO and HUC.TO have a correlation of -0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CLF.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CLF.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for HUC.TO.
CLF.TO is categorized as Canadian Government Bonds, while HUC.TO is Commodities. CLF.TO tracks Morningstar Can 1-5Y Core Bd GR CAD, while HUC.TO tracks Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for CLF.TO and 1.09% for HUC.TO.
Find the right allocation for CLF.TO and HUC.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