DGR.TO vs. FCCQ.TO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

DGR.TO (CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF) and FCCQ.TO (Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF) are both Quality Factor funds - DGR.TO tracks the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index CAD while FCCQ.TO tracks the Fidelity Canada Canadian High Quality Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DGR.TO returned 9.79%/yr vs 13.37%/yr for FCCQ.TO. Their 0.44 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. DGR.TO charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for FCCQ.TO.

Performance

DGR.TO vs. FCCQ.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 Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF (FCCQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGR.TO achieves a 6.15% return, which is significantly lower than FCCQ.TO's 8.28% 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%

FCCQ.TO

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: 0.29%
• 6M: 8.68%
• YTD: 8.28%
• 1Y: 31.29%
• 3Y*: 21.78%
• 5Y*: 13.37%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.61%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DGR.TO CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF	CA$32.50K	CA$91.64K	CA$88.11K
FCCQ.TO Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF	CA$101.79K	CA$82.56K	CA$89.46K

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DGR.TO CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF	6.15%	10.57%	16.04%	17.92%	-8.16%	24.28%	10.08%	23.98%
FCCQ.TO Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF	8.28%	32.22%	21.60%	11.04%	-7.50%	22.27%	1.92%	9.55%

Correlation

The correlation between DGR.TO and FCCQ.TO is 0.48, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2019	0.44

The correlation between DGR.TO and FCCQ.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	DGR.TO	FCCQ.TO
Technology	33.8%	13.5%
Healthcare	12.8%	4.0%
Industrials	11.8%	2.8%
Communication Services	11.1%	-
Financial Services	8.4%	25.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	4.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	5.6%
Energy	4.5%	10.1%
Basic Materials	2.8%	18.2%
Utilities	0.2%	-
Real Estate	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

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

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

DGR.TO

DGR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 43
DGR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
DGR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
DGR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 43
DGR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
DGR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 46

FCCQ.TO

FCCQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 82
FCCQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
FCCQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
FCCQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 84
FCCQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
FCCQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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. FCCQ.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 Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF (FCCQ.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.TO	FCCQ.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.10	2.04	-0.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.69	2.66	-0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.36	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.36	2.71	-1.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.26	10.70	-5.44

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

The current DGR.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is lower than the FCCQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGR.TO and FCCQ.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.

Drawdowns

DGR.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGR.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.73%, smaller than the maximum FCCQ.TO drawdown of -35.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGR.TO and FCCQ.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	DGR.TO	FCCQ.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.73%	-35.56%	+4.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.55%	-11.29%	+2.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.65%	-13.41%	-3.24%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.92%	-17.96%	+0.04%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.83%	-1.17%	-0.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.51%	-3.98%	+0.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.21%	2.86%	-0.65%

Volatility

DGR.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.TO) is 2.72%, while Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF (FCCQ.TO) has a volatility of 3.60%. This indicates that DGR.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCCQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DGR.TO	FCCQ.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.72%	3.60%	-0.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.27%	11.48%	-3.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.55%	15.04%	-4.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.08%	13.79%	+0.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.21%	16.03%	-0.82%

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

DGR.TO has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than FCCQ.TO's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

DGR.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

DGR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, less than FCCQ.TO's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
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%
FCCQ.TO Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF	1.47%	1.44%	1.85%	2.41%	2.33%	1.92%	2.14%	2.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DGR.TO and FCCQ.TO in my portfolio?

DGR.TO and FCCQ.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.

Which ETF is better, DGR.TO or FCCQ.TO?

On fees, FCCQ.TO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, DGR.TO or FCCQ.TO?

FCCQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for DGR.TO.

What is the main difference between DGR.TO and FCCQ.TO?

DGR.TO tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index CAD, while FCCQ.TO tracks Fidelity Canada Canadian High Quality Index. They also come from different issuers: CI and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for DGR.TO and 0.35% for FCCQ.TO.