PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CUD.TO (iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and PDIV.TO (Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CUD.TO is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P High Yield Dividend Aristocrats CAD Hedged Index, while PDIV.TO is a Dividend fund actively managed by Purpose Investments. CUD.TO is passively managed, while PDIV.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUD.TO returned 5.98%/yr vs 9.28%/yr for PDIV.TO. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CUD.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for PDIV.TO.

Performance

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CUD.TO) and Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF (PDIV.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CUD.TO achieves a 5.32% return, which is significantly lower than PDIV.TO's 7.12% return. Over the past 10 years, CUD.TO has underperformed PDIV.TO with an annualized return of 5.98%, while PDIV.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 9.28% annualized return.

CUD.TO

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.09%
YTD
5.32%
6M
1.10%
1Y
4.69%
3Y*
5.56%
5Y*
1.77%
10Y*
5.98%

PDIV.TO

1D
-0.52%
1M
2.70%
YTD
7.12%
6M
7.91%
1Y
18.80%
3Y*
11.94%
5Y*
8.07%
10Y*
9.28%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CUD.TO
iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		5.32%1.72%6.13%0.09%-2.31%18.87%-2.58%21.16%-5.23%14.50%
PDIV.TO
Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF		7.12%15.82%10.71%4.64%-4.40%20.18%-1.15%23.57%-15.24%26.84%

Correlation

The correlation between CUD.TO and PDIV.TO is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.61

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

0.48

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

0.33

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2013

0.30

Over the past year, CUD.TO and PDIV.TO have become more correlated (0.58) than their long-term average of 0.30, meaning their price movements have been converging.

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CUD.TO
PDIV.TO

Industrials

17.3%
5.9%

Consumer Defensive

16.2%
3.9%

Utilities

14.6%
4.5%

Financial Services

12.0%
31.6%

Technology

10.5%
12.6%

Healthcare

7.6%
6.5%

Basic Materials

6.0%
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

5.8%
7.8%

Real Estate

4.4%

-

Energy

3.2%
18.2%

Communication Services

2.5%
4.0%

Industrials

CUD.TO
17.3%
PDIV.TO
5.9%

Consumer Defensive

CUD.TO
16.2%
PDIV.TO
3.9%

Utilities

CUD.TO
14.6%
PDIV.TO
4.5%

Financial Services

CUD.TO
12.0%
PDIV.TO
31.6%

Technology

CUD.TO
10.5%
PDIV.TO
12.6%

Healthcare

CUD.TO
7.6%
PDIV.TO
6.5%

Basic Materials

CUD.TO
6.0%
PDIV.TO
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

CUD.TO
5.8%
PDIV.TO
7.8%

Real Estate

CUD.TO
4.4%
PDIV.TO

-

Energy

CUD.TO
3.2%
PDIV.TO
18.2%

Communication Services

CUD.TO
2.5%
PDIV.TO
4.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF

Often compared with CUD.TO:
CUD.TO vs. CDZ.TOCUD.TO vs. XHU.TOCUD.TO vs. DGROCUD.TO vs. CYH.TOCUD.TO vs. SCHDCUD.TO vs. ^GSPCCUD.TO vs. VDY.TO
Often compared with PDIV.TO:
PDIV.TO vs. MNY.TOPDIV.TO vs. HDIV.TOPDIV.TO vs. VDY.TOPDIV.TO vs. BMAXPDIV.TO vs. SPYIPDIV.TO vs. HYLD.TOPDIV.TO vs. PDC.TO

Return for Risk

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CUD.TO
CUD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
CUD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO
PDIV.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
PDIV.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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.

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CUD.TO) and Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF (PDIV.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.

CUD.TOPDIV.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.40
2.78

-2.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.64
3.86

-3.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.56

-0.48

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.64

3.62

-2.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.57

15.98

-14.41

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

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CUD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the PDIV.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUD.TO and PDIV.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

CUD.TOPDIV.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40

2.78

-2.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

0.82

-0.70

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.35

0.67

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

0.62

-0.03

Drawdowns

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUD.TO drawdown since its inception was -38.36%, which is greater than PDIV.TO's maximum drawdown of -30.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUD.TO and PDIV.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CUD.TOPDIV.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.36%

-30.64%

-7.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.34%

-5.22%

-2.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.28%

-8.61%

-6.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.06%

-14.96%

-3.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.36%

-30.64%

-7.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.84%

-1.27%

-3.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.09%

-4.35%

+0.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.00%

1.18%

+1.82%

Volatility

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CUD.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.69% compared to Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF (PDIV.TO) at 2.43%. This indicates that CUD.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PDIV.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CUD.TOPDIV.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.69%

2.43%

+0.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.82%

5.36%

+3.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.74%

6.79%

+4.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.67%

9.87%

+4.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.20%

13.89%

+3.31%

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CUD.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than PDIV.TO's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

CUD.TO vs. PDIV.TO - Dividend Comparison

CUD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than PDIV.TO's 11.85% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CUD.TO
iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		1.92%1.99%1.76%1.96%1.84%1.98%2.05%1.65%2.05%1.44%1.76%1.72%
PDIV.TO
Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF		11.85%12.24%12.35%11.84%6.38%5.59%6.33%5.85%6.80%25.71%5.38%8.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

CUD.TO and PDIV.TO have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CUD.TO is cheaper at 0.66% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CUD.TO is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for PDIV.TO.

CUD.TO is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while PDIV.TO is Dividend. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Purpose Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for CUD.TO and 0.77% for PDIV.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUD.TO and PDIV.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