CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

CLML.TO (CI Global Climate Leaders Fund) and CCCX.TO (CI Galaxy Core Multi-Crypto ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLML.TO is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by CI Global Asset Management, while CCCX.TO is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by CI Global Asset Management. Both are actively managed. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLML.TO charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CCCX.TO.

Performance

CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Global Climate Leaders Fund (CLML.TO) and CI Galaxy Core Multi-Crypto ETF (CCCX.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLML.TO achieves a 25.72% return, which is significantly higher than CCCX.TO's -31.77% return.

CLML.TO

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: -7.84%
• 6M: 20.44%
• YTD: 25.72%
• 1Y: 33.44%
• 3Y*: 37.82%
• 5Y*: 20.73%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.69%

CCCX.TO

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: 8.53%
• 6M: -30.24%
• YTD: -31.77%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CCCX.TO CI Galaxy Core Multi-Crypto ETF	CA$484.00	CA$315.52	CA$5.52K
CLML.TO CI Global Climate Leaders Fund	CA$494.12K	CA$394.47K	CA$468.54K

CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CLML.TO CI Global Climate Leaders Fund	25.72%	7.15%
CCCX.TO CI Galaxy Core Multi-Crypto ETF	-31.77%	-25.82%

Correlation

The correlation between CLML.TO and CCCX.TO is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2025	0.04

Return for Risk

CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CLML.TO

CLML.TO Risk / Return Rank: 68
CLML.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
CLML.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
CLML.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
CLML.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
CLML.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 76

CCCX.TO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Global Climate Leaders Fund (CLML.TO) and CI Galaxy Core Multi-Crypto ETF (CCCX.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.

	CLML.TO	CCCX.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.45	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.65	—	—

Drawdowns

CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLML.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.17%, smaller than the maximum CCCX.TO drawdown of -58.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLML.TO and CCCX.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLML.TO	CCCX.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.17%	-58.93%	+30.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.72%	-53.38%	+42.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.85%	-36.18%	+27.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.47%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CLML.TO	CCCX.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.33%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.08%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.21%	52.24%	-29.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.14%	52.24%	-31.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.08%	52.24%	-31.16%

CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLML.TO has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than CCCX.TO's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLML.TO vs. CCCX.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither CLML.TO nor CCCX.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLML.TO and CCCX.TO in my portfolio?

CLML.TO and CCCX.TO have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CLML.TO or CCCX.TO?

On fees, CCCX.TO is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLML.TO or CCCX.TO?

CCCX.TO is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for CLML.TO.

What is the main difference between CLML.TO and CCCX.TO?

CLML.TO is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while CCCX.TO is Cryptocurrency. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for CLML.TO and 0.50% for CCCX.TO.