CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO
CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) and TULV.TO (TD Q U.S. Low Volatility ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. CLU.NEO is passively managed, while TULV.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CLU.NEO returned 9.30%/yr vs 8.91%/yr for TULV.TO. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLU.NEO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for TULV.TO.
Performance
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLU.NEO achieves a 8.69% return, which is significantly higher than TULV.TO's 1.51% return.
CLU.NEO
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.57%
- YTD
- 8.69%
- 6M
- 10.48%
- 1Y
- 24.65%
- 3Y*
- 16.95%
- 5Y*
- 9.30%
- 10Y*
- 11.02%
TULV.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.26%
- YTD
- 1.51%
- 6M
- 0.08%
- 1Y
- 6.11%
- 3Y*
- 9.27%
- 5Y*
- 8.91%
- 10Y*
- —
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 8.69% | 15.20% | 14.82% | 13.13% | -9.37% | 31.13% | 17.75% |
TULV.TO TD Q U.S. Low Volatility ETF | 1.51% | 3.62% | 23.74% | -3.31% | 2.02% | 23.84% | 0.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLU.NEO and TULV.TO is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020 | 0.23 |
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
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CLU.NEO
TULV.TO
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) and TD Q U.S. Low Volatility ETF (TULV.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.
| CLU.NEO | TULV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.09 | +0.45 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.86 | 0.79 | +3.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.84 | 1.85 | +13.00 |
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
| CLU.NEO | TULV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.50 | 0.49 | +2.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 | 0.75 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.61 | 0.71 | -0.09 |
Drawdowns
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLU.NEO drawdown since its inception was -39.93%, which is greater than TULV.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLU.NEO and TULV.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLU.NEO | TULV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.93% | -11.78% | -28.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.55% | -6.56% | +0.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.57% | -11.39% | -5.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.66% | -11.78% | -8.88% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.93% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.70% | -5.64% | +4.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.74% | -3.61% | -1.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.70% | 2.83% | -1.13% |
Volatility
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) is 2.30%, while TD Q U.S. Low Volatility ETF (TULV.TO) has a volatility of 4.79%. This indicates that CLU.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TULV.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLU.NEO | TULV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.30% | 4.79% | -2.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.24% | 7.91% | -0.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.11% | 10.44% | -0.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.54% | 11.89% | +2.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.08% | 11.62% | +6.46% |
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLU.NEO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than TULV.TO's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLU.NEO vs. TULV.TO - Dividend Comparison
CLU.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, less than TULV.TO's 1.80% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 1.20% | 1.31% | 1.32% | 1.35% | 1.63% | 1.19% | 1.66% | 1.46% | 1.77% | 1.46% | 1.63% | 1.87% |
TULV.TO TD Q U.S. Low Volatility ETF | 1.80% | 1.80% | 1.48% | 1.96% | 1.57% | 1.37% | 0.83% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLU.NEO and TULV.TO have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, TULV.TO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TULV.TO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and TD. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CLU.NEO and 0.35% for TULV.TO.
Find the right allocation for CLU.NEO and TULV.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