PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DGR.TO vs. FXM.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DGR.TO vs. FXM.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 Morningstar Canada Value Index ETF (FXM.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 FXM.TO's 18.11% return. Over the past 10 years, DGR.TO has underperformed FXM.TO with an annualized return of 11.97%, while FXM.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 14.71% annualized 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%

FXM.TO

1D
-0.58%
1M
3.42%
6M
14.85%
YTD
18.11%
1Y
45.40%
3Y*
27.60%
5Y*
19.13%
10Y*
14.71%
ALL TIME*
13.03%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$32.50KCA$91.64KCA$88.11K
CA$211.28KCA$184.82KCA$281.27K

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DGR.TO
CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF
6.15%10.57%16.04%17.92%-8.16%24.28%10.08%28.48%-7.88%24.43%
FXM.TO
CI Morningstar Canada Value Index ETF
18.11%38.54%30.05%5.79%-1.19%31.47%6.16%24.14%-16.22%11.51%

Correlation

The correlation between DGR.TO and FXM.TO is 0.40, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


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

0.40

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

0.44

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

0.50

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2016

0.44

The correlation between DGR.TO and FXM.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.50 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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


Sectors
DGR.TO
FXM.TO

Technology

33.8%
6.8%

Healthcare

12.8%

-

Industrials

11.8%
3.2%

Communication Services

11.1%
9.2%

Financial Services

8.4%
14.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.0%
10.4%

Consumer Defensive

6.7%
6.9%

Energy

4.5%
14.8%

Basic Materials

2.8%
16.3%

Utilities

0.2%
14.2%

Real Estate

-

3.6%

Technology

DGR.TO
33.8%
FXM.TO
6.8%

Healthcare

DGR.TO
12.8%
FXM.TO

-

Industrials

DGR.TO
11.8%
FXM.TO
3.2%

Communication Services

DGR.TO
11.1%
FXM.TO
9.2%

Financial Services

DGR.TO
8.4%
FXM.TO
14.7%

Consumer Cyclical

DGR.TO
8.0%
FXM.TO
10.4%

Consumer Defensive

DGR.TO
6.7%
FXM.TO
6.9%

Energy

DGR.TO
4.5%
FXM.TO
14.8%

Basic Materials

DGR.TO
2.8%
FXM.TO
16.3%

Utilities

DGR.TO
0.2%
FXM.TO
14.2%

Real Estate

DGR.TO

-

FXM.TO
3.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

DGR.TO vs. FXM.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

FXM.TO
FXM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
FXM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FXM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
FXM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
FXM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
FXM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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. FXM.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 Morningstar Canada Value Index ETF (FXM.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.TOFXM.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.75

-0.55

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.36

5.51

-4.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.26

21.50

-16.25

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

The current DGR.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is lower than the FXM.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGR.TO and FXM.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. FXM.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGR.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.73%, smaller than the maximum FXM.TO drawdown of -46.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGR.TO and FXM.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DGR.TOFXM.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.73%

-46.41%

+15.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.55%

-8.11%

-0.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.65%

-12.44%

-4.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.92%

-16.08%

-1.84%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.73%

-46.41%

+15.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.83%

-0.65%

-1.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.51%

-4.64%

+1.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

2.08%

+0.13%

Volatility

DGR.TO vs. FXM.TO - Volatility Comparison

CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.72% compared to CI Morningstar Canada Value Index ETF (FXM.TO) at 2.53%. This indicates that DGR.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FXM.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DGR.TOFXM.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.72%

2.53%

+0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.27%

8.27%

0.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.55%

11.25%

-0.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.08%

14.15%

-0.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.21%

16.88%

-1.67%

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

DGR.TO has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than FXM.TO's 0.64% expense ratio.


Dividends

DGR.TO vs. FXM.TO - Dividend Comparison

DGR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, less than FXM.TO's 1.72% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%0.00%
FXM.TO
CI Morningstar Canada Value Index ETF
1.72%1.91%2.17%2.96%2.18%2.19%2.40%2.04%2.52%1.70%1.83%2.24%

Frequently Asked Questions


DGR.TO and FXM.TO have a correlation of 0.40, 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 0.64% for FXM.TO.

DGR.TO is categorized as Quality Factor, while FXM.TO is Canada Equities. DGR.TO tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index CAD, while FXM.TO tracks Morningstar Canada Target Value Index. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for DGR.TO and 0.64% for FXM.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DGR.TO and FXM.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