CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO

Last updated Jul 1, 2026

CMAR.TO (CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund) and NXF.TO (CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - CMAR.TO is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by CI, while NXF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by CI. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CMAR.TO returned 1.48%/yr vs 14.15%/yr for NXF.TO. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions.

Performance

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund (CMAR.TO) and CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMAR.TO achieves a 2.18% return, which is significantly lower than NXF.TO's 14.91% return.

CMAR.TO

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 0.48%
• YTD: 2.18%
• 6M: 2.12%
• 1Y: 3.77%
• 3Y*: 4.80%
• 5Y*: 1.48%
• 10Y*: —

NXF.TO

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: -9.01%
• YTD: 14.91%
• 6M: 14.49%
• 1Y: 23.67%
• 3Y*: 9.39%
• 5Y*: 14.15%
• 10Y*: 6.24%

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

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CMAR.TO CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund	2.18%	4.98%	3.37%	5.33%	-8.32%	0.98%	6.73%
NXF.TO CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)	14.91%	9.09%	-4.58%	6.48%	43.93%	40.62%	-31.15%

Correlation

The correlation between CMAR.TO and NXF.TO is -0.15, 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	-0.15
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.05
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2020	-0.05

The correlation between CMAR.TO and NXF.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to -0.03 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CMAR.TO

CMAR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 41
CMAR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
CMAR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
CMAR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CMAR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CMAR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 53

NXF.TO

NXF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 35
NXF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
NXF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
NXF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 34
NXF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
NXF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund (CMAR.TO) and CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.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.

	CMAR.TO	NXF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	1.20	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.60	1.67	-0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.21	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	1.35	+0.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.86	5.02	+2.85

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMAR.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is comparable to the NXF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMAR.TO and NXF.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

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMAR.TO drawdown since its inception was -12.07%, smaller than the maximum NXF.TO drawdown of -65.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMAR.TO and NXF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CMAR.TO	NXF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.07%	-65.25%	+53.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.92%	-17.57%	+15.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.60%	-24.32%	+18.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-12.07%	-24.32%	+12.25%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.00%	-17.57%	+17.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.85%	-15.98%	+13.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.50%	4.73%	-4.23%

Volatility

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund (CMAR.TO) is 0.84%, while CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.TO) has a volatility of 6.34%. This indicates that CMAR.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NXF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CMAR.TO	NXF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.84%	6.34%	-5.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.00%	16.35%	-14.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.55%	19.83%	-16.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.81%	23.41%	-17.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.37%	26.03%	-20.66%

Dividends

CMAR.TO vs. NXF.TO - Dividend Comparison

CMAR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.42%, less than NXF.TO's 8.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CMAR.TO CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund	4.42%	4.42%	4.44%	4.39%	3.49%	2.93%	2.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NXF.TO CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)	8.91%	7.70%	8.50%	8.60%	11.22%	9.46%	11.24%	7.83%	9.39%	6.49%	8.24%	8.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CMAR.TO and NXF.TO in my portfolio?

CMAR.TO and NXF.TO have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

What is the main difference between CMAR.TO and NXF.TO?

CMAR.TO is categorized as Nontraditional Bonds, while NXF.TO is Energy Equities.