PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
COW.TO vs. RUD.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

COW.TO (iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF) and RUD.TO (RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. COW.TO is passively managed, while RUD.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, COW.TO returned 8.34%/yr vs 17.31%/yr for RUD.TO. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. COW.TO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.43%/yr for RUD.TO.

Performance

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO) and RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COW.TO achieves a 13.43% return, which is significantly higher than RUD.TO's 10.65% return. Over the past 10 years, COW.TO has underperformed RUD.TO with an annualized return of 8.34%, while RUD.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 17.31% annualized return.

COW.TO

1D
0.41%
1M
-0.57%
YTD
13.43%
6M
9.29%
1Y
1.58%
3Y*
6.31%
5Y*
3.78%
10Y*
8.34%

RUD.TO

1D
-0.80%
1M
2.34%
YTD
10.65%
6M
6.89%
1Y
23.66%
3Y*
19.61%
5Y*
16.39%
10Y*
17.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
COW.TO
iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF		13.43%-4.34%5.62%-8.61%12.62%19.09%11.78%26.04%-14.16%14.90%
RUD.TO
RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)		10.65%7.35%25.76%23.90%-15.14%54.34%13.61%25.93%6.03%14.39%

Correlation

The correlation between COW.TO and RUD.TO is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.30

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

0.36

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

0.40

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2014

0.50

The correlation between COW.TO and RUD.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (1 year) to 0.50 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
COW.TO
RUD.TO

Consumer Defensive

42.6%
8.4%

Basic Materials

27.7%
0.5%

Industrials

27.6%
8.7%

Consumer Cyclical

1.6%
13.2%

Financial Services

0.6%
12.9%

Communication Services

-

8.4%

Energy

-

5.0%

Healthcare

-

8.0%

Real Estate

-

0.8%

Technology

-

31.1%

Utilities

-

3.0%

Consumer Defensive

COW.TO
42.6%
RUD.TO
8.4%

Basic Materials

COW.TO
27.7%
RUD.TO
0.5%

Industrials

COW.TO
27.6%
RUD.TO
8.7%

Consumer Cyclical

COW.TO
1.6%
RUD.TO
13.2%

Financial Services

COW.TO
0.6%
RUD.TO
12.9%

Communication Services

COW.TO

-

RUD.TO
8.4%

Energy

COW.TO

-

RUD.TO
5.0%

Healthcare

COW.TO

-

RUD.TO
8.0%

Real Estate

COW.TO

-

RUD.TO
0.8%

Technology

COW.TO

-

RUD.TO
31.1%

Utilities

COW.TO

-

RUD.TO
3.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF

RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)

Often compared with COW.TO:
COW.TO vs. NTR.TOCOW.TO vs. CWW.TOCOW.TO vs. COWGCOW.TO vs. VOOCOW.TO vs. XHC.TOCOW.TO vs. DBACOW.TO vs. ZWC.TO
Often compared with RUD.TO:
RUD.TO vs. VGG.TORUD.TO vs. ZUQ.TORUD.TO vs. ZGQ.TORUD.TO vs. CEW.TORUD.TO vs. FCUV.TORUD.TO vs. XGRO.TORUD.TO vs. QQC.TO

Return for Risk

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
COW.TO
COW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
COW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
COW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
COW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
COW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank
RUD.TO
RUD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
RUD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RUD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
RUD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
RUD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
RUD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO) and RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.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.

COW.TORUD.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.10
1.91

-1.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.26
2.61

-2.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.03

1.36

-0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.12

3.58

-3.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.28

12.74

-12.46

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COW.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.10, which is lower than the RUD.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COW.TO and RUD.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...

Drawdowns

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COW.TO drawdown since its inception was -55.00%, which is greater than RUD.TO's maximum drawdown of -35.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COW.TO and RUD.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

COW.TORUD.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.00%

-35.99%

-19.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.43%

-6.65%

-6.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.51%

-28.31%

+13.80%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.84%

-28.31%

-1.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.38%

-35.99%

-6.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.48%

-0.87%

-11.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.68%

-10.08%

-4.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.63%

1.86%

+3.77%

Volatility

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW.TO) is 3.25%, while RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) has a volatility of 3.70%. This indicates that COW.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RUD.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

COW.TORUD.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.25%

3.70%

-0.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.76%

9.78%

+2.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.10%

12.44%

+3.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.89%

35.34%

-16.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.84%

44.72%

-22.88%

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

COW.TO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than RUD.TO's 0.43% expense ratio.

Dividends

COW.TO vs. RUD.TO - Dividend Comparison

COW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.17%, more than RUD.TO's 1.38% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COW.TO
iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF		2.17%2.46%1.43%1.62%2.01%0.69%1.13%1.13%1.18%0.63%1.21%1.96%
RUD.TO
RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)		1.38%1.38%3.43%5.24%5.51%3.38%5.73%6.77%7.06%6.23%6.07%7.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

COW.TO and RUD.TO have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, RUD.TO is cheaper at 0.43% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RUD.TO is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for COW.TO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and RBC. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for COW.TO and 0.43% for RUD.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for COW.TO and RUD.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