CLML.TO vs. CRED.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

CLML.TO (CI Global Climate Leaders Fund) and CRED.TO (CI Alternative Investment Grade Credit Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - CLML.TO is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by CI Global Asset Management, while CRED.TO is a Investment Grade Bonds fund actively managed by CI Global Asset Management. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CLML.TO returned 20.73%/yr vs 2.92%/yr for CRED.TO. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLML.TO charges 0.99%/yr vs 1.94%/yr for CRED.TO.

Performance

CLML.TO vs. CRED.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 Alternative Investment Grade Credit Fund (CRED.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 CRED.TO's 1.05% 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%

CRED.TO

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: -0.25%
• 6M: 0.90%
• YTD: 1.05%
• 1Y: 3.16%
• 3Y*: 5.44%
• 5Y*: 2.92%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.25%

*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)
CLML.TO CI Global Climate Leaders Fund	CA$494.12K	CA$394.47K	CA$468.54K
CRED.TO CI Alternative Investment Grade Credit Fund	CA$47.86K	CA$36.58K	CA$31.94K

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CLML.TO CI Global Climate Leaders Fund	25.72%	25.21%	63.19%	12.83%	-18.69%	9.27%
CRED.TO CI Alternative Investment Grade Credit Fund	1.05%	2.77%	9.26%	6.00%	-3.41%	-0.20%

Correlation

The correlation between CLML.TO and CRED.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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.04
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.00
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2021	0.04

Return for Risk

CLML.TO vs. CRED.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

CRED.TO

CRED.TO Risk / Return Rank: 71
CRED.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
CRED.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
CRED.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CRED.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
CRED.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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. CRED.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 Alternative Investment Grade Credit Fund (CRED.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	CRED.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.45	1.71	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	2.51	-0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.36	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	2.09	+0.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.65	7.08	+2.57

CLML.TO vs. CRED.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLML.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.45, which is comparable to the CRED.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLML.TO and CRED.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CLML.TO vs. CRED.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLML.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.17%, which is greater than CRED.TO's maximum drawdown of -10.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLML.TO and CRED.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLML.TO	CRED.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.17%	-10.05%	-18.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.58%	-1.52%	-10.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.94%	-2.82%	-23.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.17%	-6.00%	-22.17%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.72%	-0.30%	-10.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.85%	-1.45%	-7.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.47%	0.45%	+3.02%

Volatility

CLML.TO vs. CRED.TO - Volatility Comparison

CI Global Climate Leaders Fund (CLML.TO) has a higher volatility of 8.33% compared to CI Alternative Investment Grade Credit Fund (CRED.TO) at 0.52%. This indicates that CLML.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRED.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CLML.TO	CRED.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.33%	0.52%	+7.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.08%	1.46%	+17.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.21%	1.86%	+21.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.14%	2.69%	+18.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.08%	3.44%	+17.64%

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

CLML.TO has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is lower than CRED.TO's 1.94% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLML.TO vs. CRED.TO - Dividend Comparison

CLML.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CRED.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.97%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CLML.TO CI Global Climate Leaders Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CRED.TO CI Alternative Investment Grade Credit Fund	2.97%	2.96%	2.95%	3.13%	3.21%	3.01%	2.79%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

CLML.TO and CRED.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 CRED.TO?

On fees, CLML.TO is cheaper at 0.99% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

CLML.TO is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.94% for CRED.TO.

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

CLML.TO is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while CRED.TO is Investment Grade Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for CLML.TO and 1.94% for CRED.TO.