PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

CUD.TO vs. XEF.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CUD.TO (iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and XEF.TO (iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index 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 XEF.TO is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Investable Market Index (CAD). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUD.TO returned 5.98%/yr vs 9.77%/yr for XEF.TO. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CUD.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for XEF.TO.

Performance

CUD.TO vs. XEF.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 iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (XEF.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 XEF.TO's 9.95% return. Over the past 10 years, CUD.TO has underperformed XEF.TO with an annualized return of 5.98%, while XEF.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 9.77% 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%

XEF.TO

1D
-0.41%
1M
5.38%
YTD
9.95%
6M
10.72%
1Y
23.12%
3Y*
17.83%
5Y*
10.89%
10Y*
9.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CUD.TO vs. XEF.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%
XEF.TO
iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF		9.95%25.69%12.04%15.21%-9.53%10.36%6.13%15.86%-6.65%18.19%

Correlation

The correlation between CUD.TO and XEF.TO is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.48

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

0.47

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

0.54

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2013

0.52

The correlation between CUD.TO and XEF.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
CUD.TO
XEF.TO

Industrials

17.3%
20.5%

Consumer Defensive

16.2%
6.4%

Utilities

14.6%
3.8%

Financial Services

12.0%
22.9%

Technology

10.5%
10.2%

Healthcare

7.6%
9.8%

Basic Materials

6.0%
6.6%

Consumer Cyclical

5.8%
8.2%

Real Estate

4.4%
3.1%

Energy

3.2%
4.0%

Communication Services

2.5%
4.4%

Industrials

CUD.TO
17.3%
XEF.TO
20.5%

Consumer Defensive

CUD.TO
16.2%
XEF.TO
6.4%

Utilities

CUD.TO
14.6%
XEF.TO
3.8%

Financial Services

CUD.TO
12.0%
XEF.TO
22.9%

Technology

CUD.TO
10.5%
XEF.TO
10.2%

Healthcare

CUD.TO
7.6%
XEF.TO
9.8%

Basic Materials

CUD.TO
6.0%
XEF.TO
6.6%

Consumer Cyclical

CUD.TO
5.8%
XEF.TO
8.2%

Real Estate

CUD.TO
4.4%
XEF.TO
3.1%

Energy

CUD.TO
3.2%
XEF.TO
4.0%

Communication Services

CUD.TO
2.5%
XEF.TO
4.4%

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)

iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index 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 XEF.TO:
XEF.TO vs. XEC.TOXEF.TO vs. VIU.TOXEF.TO vs. ZEA.TOXEF.TO vs. XFH.TOXEF.TO vs. IEFAXEF.TO vs. XIC.TOXEF.TO vs. XEF-U.TO

Return for Risk

CUD.TO vs. XEF.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
XEF.TO
XEF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
XEF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
XEF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
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. XEF.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 iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (XEF.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.TOXEF.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.40
1.68

-1.28

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.64
2.41

-1.78

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.31

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.64

2.06

-1.42

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.57

8.22

-6.66

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. XEF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CUD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the XEF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUD.TO and XEF.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.TOXEF.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40

1.68

-1.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

0.81

-0.69

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.35

0.66

-0.31

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

0.71

-0.11

Drawdowns

CUD.TO vs. XEF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUD.TO drawdown since its inception was -38.36%, which is greater than XEF.TO's maximum drawdown of -28.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUD.TO and XEF.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CUD.TOXEF.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.36%

-28.51%

-9.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.34%

-11.27%

+3.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.28%

-14.32%

-0.96%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.06%

-24.58%

+6.52%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.36%

-28.51%

-9.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.84%

-1.09%

-3.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.09%

-4.62%

+0.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.00%

2.82%

+0.18%

Volatility

CUD.TO vs. XEF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CUD.TO) is 2.69%, while iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (XEF.TO) has a volatility of 4.77%. This indicates that CUD.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XEF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CUD.TOXEF.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.69%

4.77%

-2.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.82%

11.56%

-2.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.74%

13.85%

-2.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.67%

13.58%

+1.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.20%

14.85%

+2.35%

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

CUD.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than XEF.TO's 0.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

CUD.TO vs. XEF.TO - Dividend Comparison

CUD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than XEF.TO's 2.21% 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%
XEF.TO
iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF		2.21%2.43%2.76%2.75%2.93%2.42%1.93%2.72%2.76%2.10%2.42%2.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

CUD.TO and XEF.TO have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XEF.TO is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEF.TO is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for CUD.TO.

CUD.TO is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while XEF.TO is Foreign Large Cap Equities. CUD.TO tracks S&P High Yield Dividend Aristocrats CAD Hedged Index, while XEF.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Investable Market Index (CAD). Their fees differ too: 0.66% for CUD.TO and 0.23% for XEF.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUD.TO and XEF.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