PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO

Last updated Jul 16, 2026
Documentation

CSBG.NEO (CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF) and XGRO.TO (iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CSBG.NEO returned 0.96%/yr vs 17.69%/yr for XGRO.TO. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSBG.NEO charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XGRO.TO.

Performance

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSBG.NEO achieves a 0.49% return, which is significantly lower than XGRO.TO's 11.53% return.

CSBG.NEO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.49%
6M
0.49%
YTD
0.49%
1Y
0.49%
3Y*
0.96%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

XGRO.TO

1D
0.26%
1M
0.18%
6M
8.18%
YTD
11.53%
1Y
21.61%
3Y*
17.69%
5Y*
10.59%
10Y*
10.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CSBG.NEO
CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF		0.49%0.00%1.17%1.22%0.27%2.60%
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		11.53%15.62%20.17%15.06%-11.05%4.32%

Correlation

The correlation between CSBG.NEO and XGRO.TO is 0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

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

0.05

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

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 19, 2021

0.03

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF

iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio

Often compared with CSBG.NEO:
CSBG.NEO vs. GRO.TOCSBG.NEO vs. CEQT.TOCSBG.NEO vs. PYF.TOCSBG.NEO vs. HBAL.TOCSBG.NEO vs. TCON.TOCSBG.NEO vs. CCAD.TOCSBG.NEO vs. ATMP
Often compared with XGRO.TO:
XGRO.TO vs. XEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. VGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. VEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. XCG.TOXGRO.TO vs. TGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. XAW.TO

Return for Risk

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

XGRO.TO
XGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.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.

CSBG.NEOXGRO.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.01
1.92

-0.92

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

—

2.76

—

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

—

1.36

—

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

—

3.05

—

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

—

13.24

—

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSBG.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is lower than the XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSBG.NEO and XGRO.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

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSBG.NEO drawdown since its inception was 0.00%, smaller than the maximum XGRO.TO drawdown of -47.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSBG.NEO and XGRO.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CSBG.NEOXGRO.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

0.00%

-47.99%

+47.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

0.00%

-7.12%

+7.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

0.00%

-12.47%

+12.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-18.38%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-25.85%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.26%

+1.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

0.00%

-8.47%

+8.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.00%

1.64%

-1.64%

Volatility

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO) is 0.49%, while iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) has a volatility of 2.92%. This indicates that CSBG.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XGRO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CSBG.NEOXGRO.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.49%

2.92%

-2.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.49%

9.69%

-9.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49%

11.32%

-10.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.11%

11.16%

-10.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

1.11%

13.28%

-12.17%

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSBG.NEO has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than XGRO.TO's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSBG.NEO vs. XGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

CSBG.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.48%, less than XGRO.TO's 1.89% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CSBG.NEO
CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF		0.48%0.00%1.16%1.21%0.27%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		1.89%1.94%2.01%2.27%1.89%1.70%1.99%2.27%7.62%2.09%2.70%2.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

CSBG.NEO and XGRO.TO have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XGRO.TO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XGRO.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: CIBC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for CSBG.NEO and 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CSBG.NEO and XGRO.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