CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CWO.NEO (iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF) and CASH.TO (Global X High Interest Savings ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CWO.NEO is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index, while CASH.TO is a Money Market fund actively managed by Global X. CWO.NEO is passively managed, while CASH.TO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CWO.NEO returned 23.05%/yr vs 3.62%/yr for CASH.TO. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CWO.NEO charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for CASH.TO.

Performance

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWO.NEO achieves a 13.80% return, which is significantly higher than CASH.TO's 0.83% return.

CWO.NEO

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: 4.14%
• YTD: 13.80%
• 6M: 13.05%
• 1Y: 35.32%
• 3Y*: 23.05%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: 11.43%

CASH.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.15%
• YTD: 0.83%
• 6M: 1.01%
• 1Y: 2.22%
• 3Y*: 3.62%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF	13.80%	26.34%	22.33%	9.56%	-9.03%	1.47%
CASH.TO Global X High Interest Savings ETF	0.83%	2.45%	4.53%	5.11%	2.39%	0.08%

Correlation

The correlation between CWO.NEO and CASH.TO is -0.10, 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	-0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2021	0.00

Return for Risk

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWO.NEO

CWO.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 68
CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CWO.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
CWO.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 72
CWO.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
CWO.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 68

CASH.TO

CASH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 100
CASH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
CASH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
CASH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 100
CASH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CASH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.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.

	CWO.NEO	CASH.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	10.33	-8.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.05	32.48	-29.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	7.47	-6.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.26	111.49	-108.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.37	468.24	-455.87
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is lower than the CASH.TO Sharpe Ratio of 10.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWO.NEO and CASH.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

	CWO.NEO	CASH.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.29	10.33	-8.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	5.52	-5.07

Drawdowns

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWO.NEO drawdown since its inception was -31.99%, which is greater than CASH.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWO.NEO and CASH.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWO.NEO	CASH.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.99%	-0.80%	-31.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.90%	-0.02%	-10.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.12%	-0.06%	-17.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.80%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.97%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	0.00%	-1.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.29%	-0.00%	-10.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	0.00%	+2.86%

Volatility

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) has a higher volatility of 5.40% compared to Global X High Interest Savings ETF (CASH.TO) at 0.06%. This indicates that CWO.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CASH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWO.NEO	CASH.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.40%	0.06%	+5.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.46%	0.13%	+12.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.50%	0.22%	+15.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.65%	0.61%	+16.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.52%	0.61%	+16.91%

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWO.NEO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than CASH.TO's 0.11% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWO.NEO vs. CASH.TO - Dividend Comparison

CWO.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, more than CASH.TO's 2.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CASH.TO Global X High Interest Savings ETF	2.19%	2.53%	4.37%	5.06%	2.30%	0.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF	2.45%	2.79%	3.50%	4.14%	5.03%	4.61%	2.64%	3.01%	3.22%	2.60%	2.57%	3.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CWO.NEO and CASH.TO in my portfolio?

CWO.NEO and CASH.TO have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CWO.NEO or CASH.TO?

On fees, CASH.TO is cheaper at 0.11% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CWO.NEO or CASH.TO?

CASH.TO is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CWO.NEO.

What is the main difference between CWO.NEO and CASH.TO?

CWO.NEO is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while CASH.TO is Money Market. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for CWO.NEO and 0.11% for CASH.TO.