PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CWW.TO vs. IXJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CWW.TO vs. IXJ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CWW.TO (iShares Global Water Index ETF) and IXJ (iShares Global Healthcare ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CWW.TO is a Water Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while IXJ is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Healthcare Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CWW.TO returned 8.42%/yr vs 8.44%/yr for IXJ. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CWW.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for IXJ.

Performance

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) and iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CWW.TO is traded in CAD, while IXJ is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IXJ values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWW.TO achieves a 0.67% return, which is significantly higher than IXJ's -4.05% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CWW.TO having a 8.42% annualized return and IXJ not far ahead at 8.44%.

CWW.TO

1D
0.76%
1M
-0.37%
YTD
0.67%
6M
-4.32%
1Y
3.23%
3Y*
6.26%
5Y*
4.32%
10Y*
8.42%

IXJ

1D
0.80%
1M
2.34%
YTD
-4.05%
6M
-5.25%
1Y
10.71%
3Y*
5.64%
5Y*
7.00%
10Y*
8.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		0.67%10.11%2.99%11.71%-16.52%27.08%12.93%26.85%-2.69%17.91%
IXJ
iShares Global Healthcare ETF		-4.05%9.71%9.19%1.34%1.84%18.52%10.84%17.17%11.55%12.77%

Correlation

The correlation between CWW.TO and IXJ is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.43

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

0.41

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

0.47

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2009

0.47

The correlation between CWW.TO and IXJ shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (3 years) to 0.52 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CWW.TO
IXJ

Utilities

46.7%

-

Industrials

44.2%

-

Basic Materials

5.8%

-

Energy

1.6%

-

Technology

1.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

0.5%

-

Real Estate

0.2%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

0.5%

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

98.9%

Utilities

CWW.TO
46.7%
IXJ

-

Industrials

CWW.TO
44.2%
IXJ

-

Basic Materials

CWW.TO
5.8%
IXJ

-

Energy

CWW.TO
1.6%
IXJ

-

Technology

CWW.TO
1.1%
IXJ

-

Consumer Cyclical

CWW.TO
0.5%
IXJ

-

Real Estate

CWW.TO
0.2%
IXJ

-

Communication Services

CWW.TO

-

IXJ

-

Consumer Defensive

CWW.TO

-

IXJ
0.5%

Financial Services

CWW.TO

-

IXJ

-

Healthcare

CWW.TO

-

IXJ
98.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Global Water Index ETF

iShares Global Healthcare ETF

Often compared with CWW.TO:
CWW.TO vs. FIWCWW.TO vs. COW.TOCWW.TO vs. CIF.TOCWW.TO vs. KBWBCWW.TO vs. VFV.TOCWW.TO vs. XAW.TOCWW.TO vs. ENFR
Often compared with IXJ:
IXJ vs. XLVIXJ vs. VHTIXJ vs. XDWH.LIXJ vs. IHIIXJ vs. FHLCIXJ vs. IVVIXJ vs. HLTH.L

Return for Risk

CWW.TO vs. IXJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CWW.TO
CWW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
IXJ
IXJ Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
IXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
IXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
IXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
IXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
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.

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) and iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ). 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.

CWW.TOIXJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.23
0.74

-0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.44
1.18

-0.74

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

1.14

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.32

0.99

-0.68

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.79

2.45

-1.66

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

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.23, which is lower than the IXJ Sharpe Ratio of 0.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWW.TO and IXJ, 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

CWW.TOIXJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

0.74

-0.51

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.54

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.51

0.58

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.88

-0.50

Drawdowns

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWW.TO drawdown since its inception was -46.54%, which is greater than IXJ's maximum drawdown of -20.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWW.TO and IXJ.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CWW.TOIXJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.54%

-20.72%

-25.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.24%

-10.84%

+0.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.77%

-15.39%

-4.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.05%

-15.39%

-15.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.05%

-20.72%

-10.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.12%

-7.93%

-0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.47%

-4.12%

-5.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

4.39%

-0.28%

Volatility

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.23% compared to iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) at 3.92%. This indicates that CWW.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CWW.TOIXJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.23%

3.92%

+0.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.85%

10.38%

+0.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.83%

14.53%

-0.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.40%

13.11%

+2.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.52%

14.60%

+1.92%

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWW.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than IXJ's 0.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWW.TO vs. IXJ - Dividend Comparison

CWW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.56%, more than IXJ's 1.47% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		1.56%1.34%1.05%1.17%1.28%2.62%1.11%1.24%2.95%1.41%1.60%1.16%
IXJ
iShares Global Healthcare ETF		1.47%1.40%1.50%1.38%1.17%1.12%1.27%1.42%2.11%1.46%1.73%2.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

CWW.TO and IXJ have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IXJ is cheaper at 0.46% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IXJ is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for CWW.TO.

CWW.TO is categorized as Water Equities, while IXJ is Health & Biotech Equities. CWW.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while IXJ tracks S&P Global Healthcare Sector Index. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for CWW.TO and 0.46% for IXJ.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CWW.TO and IXJ

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