PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CMGG.TO (CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund) and XDGH.TO (iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both Global Equities funds. CMGG.TO is actively managed, while XDGH.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CMGG.TO returned 20.56%/yr vs 8.12%/yr for XDGH.TO. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CMGG.TO charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for XDGH.TO.

Performance

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.TO) and iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMGG.TO achieves a 21.24% return, which is significantly higher than XDGH.TO's 7.16% return.

CMGG.TO

1D
0.12%
1M
10.96%
YTD
21.24%
6M
21.36%
1Y
38.88%
3Y*
35.34%
5Y*
20.56%
10Y*
—

XDGH.TO

1D
0.16%
1M
2.01%
YTD
7.16%
6M
8.39%
1Y
17.12%
3Y*
12.90%
5Y*
8.12%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CMGG.TO
CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund		21.24%21.00%52.95%24.21%-21.16%11.08%
XDGH.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		7.16%14.60%10.46%8.74%-1.32%12.77%

Correlation

The correlation between CMGG.TO and XDGH.TO is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.22

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.24

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 13, 2021

0.27

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund

iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with CMGG.TO:
CMGG.TO vs. FCCM.NEOCMGG.TO vs. VMO.TOCMGG.TO vs. CLML.TOCMGG.TO vs. SPMOCMGG.TO vs. ARKKCMGG.TO vs. GRNYCMGG.TO vs. GARP
Often compared with XDGH.TO:
XDGH.TO vs. XDG.TOXDGH.TO vs. XHD.TOXDGH.TO vs. XEQT.TOXDGH.TO vs. XDUH.TOXDGH.TO vs. VFV.TOXDGH.TO vs. VIDY.TOXDGH.TO vs. ACWV

Return for Risk

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CMGG.TO
CMGG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
CMGG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMGG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMGG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
CMGG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMGG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO
XDGH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
XDGH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.TO) and iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.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.

CMGG.TOXDGH.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.36
1.78

+0.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.14
2.69

+0.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.32

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.85

2.69

+1.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.77

8.01

+2.77

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMGG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is higher than the XDGH.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMGG.TO and XDGH.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CMGG.TOXDGH.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.36

1.78

+0.59

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.14

0.67

+0.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.98

0.54

+0.44

Drawdowns

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMGG.TO drawdown since its inception was -29.00%, smaller than the maximum XDGH.TO drawdown of -32.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMGG.TO and XDGH.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CMGG.TOXDGH.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.00%

-32.99%

+3.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.15%

-6.38%

-3.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.85%

-11.96%

-10.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.00%

-14.56%

-14.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-2.25%

+2.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.91%

-3.63%

-5.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.62%

2.14%

+1.48%

Volatility

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Volatility Comparison

CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.TO) has a higher volatility of 6.68% compared to iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.TO) at 2.55%. This indicates that CMGG.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDGH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CMGG.TOXDGH.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.68%

2.55%

+4.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.94%

6.84%

+6.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.53%

9.67%

+6.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.22%

12.14%

+6.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.49%

14.60%

+3.89%

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMGG.TO has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than XDGH.TO's 0.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

CMGG.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Dividend Comparison

CMGG.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XDGH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.81%.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
CMGG.TO
CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XDGH.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.81%2.81%3.04%3.41%3.18%3.05%3.24%2.82%3.29%0.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

CMGG.TO and XDGH.TO have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XDGH.TO is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XDGH.TO is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CMGG.TO.

They also come from different issuers: CI Global Asset Management and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for CMGG.TO and 0.22% for XDGH.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CMGG.TO and XDGH.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