PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

DGR.TO (CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF) and CGRA.TO (CI Global Real Asset Private Pool) are both exchange-traded funds - DGR.TO is a Quality Factor fund tracking the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index CAD, while CGRA.TO is a Infrastructure Equities fund actively managed by CI. DGR.TO is passively managed, while CGRA.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, DGR.TO returned 9.79%/yr vs 7.46%/yr for CGRA.TO. Their 0.16 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. DGR.TO charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for CGRA.TO.

Performance

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.TO) and CI Global Real Asset Private Pool (CGRA.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGR.TO achieves a 6.15% return, which is significantly lower than CGRA.TO's 16.82% return.

DGR.TO

1D
0.39%
1M
0.41%
6M
4.67%
YTD
6.15%
1Y
13.25%
3Y*
11.98%
5Y*
9.79%
10Y*
11.97%
ALL TIME*
11.86%

CGRA.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
1.14%
6M
13.33%
YTD
16.82%
1Y
17.95%
3Y*
12.41%
5Y*
7.46%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
8.99%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

CGRA.TO

CI Global Real Asset Private Pool
CA$17.30KCA$23.48KCA$23.90K

DGR.TO

CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF
CA$32.50KCA$91.64KCA$88.11K

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
DGR.TO
CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF		6.15%10.57%16.04%17.92%-8.16%24.28%24.00%
CGRA.TO
CI Global Real Asset Private Pool		16.82%7.16%10.58%6.33%-9.03%20.00%6.05%

Correlation

The correlation between DGR.TO and CGRA.TO is 0.08, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.08

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.13

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.18

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2020

0.16

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
DGR.TO
CGRA.TO

Technology

33.8%

-

Healthcare

12.8%

-

Industrials

11.8%
16.8%

Communication Services

11.1%
1.0%

Financial Services

8.4%

-

Consumer Cyclical

8.0%

-

Consumer Defensive

6.7%

-

Energy

4.5%
9.0%

Basic Materials

2.8%

-

Utilities

0.2%
22.4%

Real Estate

-

50.9%

Technology

DGR.TO
33.8%
CGRA.TO

-

Healthcare

DGR.TO
12.8%
CGRA.TO

-

Industrials

DGR.TO
11.8%
CGRA.TO
16.8%

Communication Services

DGR.TO
11.1%
CGRA.TO
1.0%

Financial Services

DGR.TO
8.4%
CGRA.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

DGR.TO
8.0%
CGRA.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

DGR.TO
6.7%
CGRA.TO

-

Energy

DGR.TO
4.5%
CGRA.TO
9.0%

Basic Materials

DGR.TO
2.8%
CGRA.TO

-

Utilities

DGR.TO
0.2%
CGRA.TO
22.4%

Real Estate

DGR.TO

-

CGRA.TO
50.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF

CI Global Real Asset Private Pool

Often compared with DGR.TO:
DGR.TO vs. EHE.TODGR.TO vs. ZZZD.TODGR.TO vs. ZUD.TODGR.TO vs. CINF.TODGR.TO vs. CMNY.TODGR.TO vs. VUDV.TODGR.TO vs. DXU.TO
Often compared with CGRA.TO:
CGRA.TO vs. EHE.TOCGRA.TO vs. HCON.TOCGRA.TO vs. CGAA.TOCGRA.TO vs. FCGI.TOCGRA.TO vs. VXM-B.TOCGRA.TO vs. CMNY.TOCGRA.TO vs. ZBAL.TO

Return for Risk

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
DGR.TO
DGR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
DGR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank
CGRA.TO
CGRA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
CGRA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGRA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGRA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
CGRA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGRA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.TO) and CI Global Real Asset Private Pool (CGRA.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.

DGR.TOCGRA.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.10
2.13

-1.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.69
3.33

-1.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.71

-0.51

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.36

2.82

-1.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.26

10.45

-5.19

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DGR.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is lower than the CGRA.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGR.TO and CGRA.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

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGR.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.73%, which is greater than CGRA.TO's maximum drawdown of -16.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGR.TO and CGRA.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

DGR.TOCGRA.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.73%

-16.03%

-14.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.55%

-6.43%

-2.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.65%

-7.89%

-8.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.92%

-16.03%

-1.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.73%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.83%

-0.09%

-1.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.51%

-3.78%

+0.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

1.73%

+0.48%

Volatility

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Volatility Comparison

CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.72% compared to CI Global Real Asset Private Pool (CGRA.TO) at 1.32%. This indicates that DGR.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGRA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

DGR.TOCGRA.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.72%

1.32%

+1.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.27%

6.73%

+1.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.55%

8.50%

+2.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.08%

12.07%

+2.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.21%

11.61%

+3.60%

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

DGR.TO has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than CGRA.TO's 0.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

DGR.TO vs. CGRA.TO - Dividend Comparison

DGR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, less than CGRA.TO's 3.52% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CGRA.TO
CI Global Real Asset Private Pool		3.52%4.02%4.14%4.39%4.46%3.89%2.61%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
DGR.TO
CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF		1.14%1.24%0.94%1.53%1.70%1.26%1.29%1.67%1.94%1.29%0.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

DGR.TO and CGRA.TO have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, DGR.TO is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

DGR.TO is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for CGRA.TO.

DGR.TO is categorized as Quality Factor, while CGRA.TO is Infrastructure Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for DGR.TO and 0.97% for CGRA.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DGR.TO and CGRA.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