PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CRQ.NEO vs. HCA.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CRQ.NEO vs. HCA.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 Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF (HCA.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CRQ.NEO achieves a 17.22% return, which is significantly lower than HCA.TO's 23.36% return.


CRQ.NEO

1D
1.11%
1M
4.70%
YTD
17.22%
6M
20.22%
1Y
44.45%
3Y*
26.75%
5Y*
17.85%
10Y*
13.46%

HCA.TO

1D
1.32%
1M
8.67%
YTD
23.36%
6M
26.59%
1Y
66.74%
3Y*
45.48%
5Y*
28.89%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
CRQ.NEO
iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF
17.22%31.87%22.17%9.76%0.89%33.95%19.82%
HCA.TO
Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF
23.36%51.09%33.32%26.95%-4.34%48.13%23.46%

Correlation

The correlation between CRQ.NEO and HCA.TO is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.49

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

0.62

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

0.65

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2020

0.64

The correlation between CRQ.NEO and HCA.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.65 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

CRQ.NEO vs. HCA.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: 9696
Overall Rank
CRQ.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CRQ.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
CRQ.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
CRQ.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
CRQ.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

HCA.TO
HCA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
HCA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HCA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
HCA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
HCA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
HCA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF (CRQ.NEO) and Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF (HCA.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.NEOHCA.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.61

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.03

2.03

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.53

7.87

-1.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

31.92

35.72

-3.81

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

The current CRQ.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 4.55, which is comparable to the HCA.TO Sharpe Ratio of 5.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRQ.NEO and HCA.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


CRQ.NEOHCA.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.55

5.16

-0.61

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.45

1.92

-0.48

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

2.22

-1.53

Drawdowns

CRQ.NEO vs. HCA.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRQ.NEO drawdown since its inception was -41.75%, which is greater than HCA.TO's maximum drawdown of -17.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRQ.NEO and HCA.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CRQ.NEOHCA.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.75%

-17.82%

-23.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.84%

-8.52%

+1.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.70%

-12.51%

+0.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.82%

-17.82%

+2.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.62%

-3.35%

-2.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.40%

1.87%

-0.47%

Volatility

CRQ.NEO vs. HCA.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF (CRQ.NEO) is 3.13%, while Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF (HCA.TO) has a volatility of 4.21%. This indicates that CRQ.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HCA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CRQ.NEOHCA.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.13%

4.21%

-1.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.07%

11.28%

-3.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.81%

12.99%

-3.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.42%

15.12%

-2.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.27%

15.10%

+1.17%

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

CRQ.NEO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than HCA.TO's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

CRQ.NEO vs. HCA.TO - Dividend Comparison

CRQ.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than HCA.TO's 2.83% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CRQ.NEO
iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF
1.87%2.18%2.72%2.97%2.90%2.17%2.98%2.71%2.46%1.91%1.89%3.09%
HCA.TO
Hamilton Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index ETF
2.83%5.59%15.89%20.26%16.23%11.79%3.54%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CRQ.NEO and HCA.TO have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HCA.TO is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HCA.TO is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CRQ.NEO.

CRQ.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Canada Index, while HCA.TO tracks Solactive Canadian Bank Mean Reversion Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Hamilton. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CRQ.NEO and 0.45% for HCA.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CRQ.NEO and HCA.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