CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CRQ.NEO (iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF) and CLSA.TO (Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF) are both Canada Equities funds. CRQ.NEO is passively managed, while CLSA.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, CRQ.NEO returned 42.87% vs 70.18% for CLSA.TO. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CRQ.NEO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CLSA.TO.

Performance

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF (CRQ.NEO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CRQ.NEO achieves a 15.93% return, which is significantly lower than CLSA.TO's 20.72% return.

CRQ.NEO

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 3.58%
• YTD: 15.93%
• 6M: 18.90%
• 1Y: 42.87%
• 3Y*: 26.01%
• 5Y*: 17.59%
• 10Y*: 13.44%

CLSA.TO

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 7.37%
• YTD: 20.72%
• 6M: 30.07%
• 1Y: 70.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CRQ.NEO iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF	15.93%	29.84%
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF	20.72%	56.35%

Correlation

The correlation between CRQ.NEO and CLSA.TO is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025	0.50

The correlation between CRQ.NEO and CLSA.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRQ.NEO

CRQ.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 96
CRQ.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CRQ.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
CRQ.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
CRQ.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
CRQ.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

CLSA.TO

CLSA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 96
CLSA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
CLSA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CLSA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
CLSA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CLSA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF (CRQ.NEO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.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.

	CRQ.NEO	CLSA.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	4.41	4.87	-0.46
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	6.17	5.65	+0.52
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.00	1.96	+0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.30	6.54	-0.25
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	30.78	28.01	+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.

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRQ.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 4.41, which is comparable to the CLSA.TO Sharpe Ratio of 4.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRQ.NEO and CLSA.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CRQ.NEO	CLSA.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.41	4.87	-0.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.43	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	4.25	-3.56

Drawdowns

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRQ.NEO drawdown since its inception was -41.75%, which is greater than CLSA.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRQ.NEO and CLSA.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRQ.NEO	CLSA.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.75%	-11.73%	-30.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.84%	-10.78%	+3.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.70%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.82%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.75%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-1.09%	+0.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.62%	-1.37%	-4.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.40%	2.51%	-1.11%

Volatility

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF (CRQ.NEO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.TO) have volatilities of 2.99% and 3.14%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CRQ.NEO	CLSA.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.99%	3.14%	-0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.04%	12.36%	-4.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.76%	14.48%	-4.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.41%	16.54%	-4.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.27%	16.54%	-0.27%

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CRQ.NEO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSA.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

CRQ.NEO vs. CLSA.TO - Dividend Comparison

CRQ.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.90%, less than CLSA.TO's 10.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF	10.76%	7.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CRQ.NEO iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF	1.90%	2.18%	2.72%	2.97%	2.90%	2.17%	2.98%	2.71%	2.46%	1.91%	1.89%	3.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CRQ.NEO and CLSA.TO in my portfolio?

CRQ.NEO and CLSA.TO have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CRQ.NEO or CLSA.TO?

On fees, CLSA.TO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CRQ.NEO or CLSA.TO?

CLSA.TO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CRQ.NEO.

What is the main difference between CRQ.NEO and CLSA.TO?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Brompton Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CRQ.NEO and 0.60% for CLSA.TO.