ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO
ESGC.TO (Invesco S&P/TSX Composite ESG Index ETF) and CLSA.TO (Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF) are both Canada Equities funds. ESGC.TO is passively managed, while CLSA.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, ESGC.TO returned 34.84% vs 70.18% for CLSA.TO. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ESGC.TO charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CLSA.TO.
Performance
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESGC.TO achieves a 12.27% return, which is significantly lower than CLSA.TO's 20.72% return.
ESGC.TO
- 1D
- -0.35%
- 1M
- 4.89%
- YTD
- 12.27%
- 6M
- 14.01%
- 1Y
- 34.84%
- 3Y*
- 22.81%
- 5Y*
- 13.73%
- 10Y*
- —
CLSA.TO
- 1D
- 0.25%
- 1M
- 7.37%
- YTD
- 20.72%
- 6M
- 30.07%
- 1Y
- 70.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ESGC.TO Invesco S&P/TSX Composite ESG Index ETF | 12.27% | 27.78% |
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF | 20.72% | 56.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESGC.TO and CLSA.TO is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025 | 0.47 |
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
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ESGC.TO
CLSA.TO
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P/TSX Composite ESG Index ETF (ESGC.TO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.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.
| ESGC.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.96 | -0.42 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.45 | 6.54 | -3.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.05 | 28.01 | -12.96 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ESGC.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.82 | 4.87 | -2.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.09 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.26 | 4.25 | -2.99 |
Drawdowns
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ESGC.TO drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, which is greater than CLSA.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESGC.TO and CLSA.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESGC.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.66% | -11.73% | -4.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.14% | -10.78% | +0.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.51% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.66% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.35% | -1.09% | +0.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.61% | -1.37% | -2.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.32% | 2.51% | -0.19% |
Volatility
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P/TSX Composite ESG Index ETF (ESGC.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.19% compared to Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.TO) at 3.14%. This indicates that ESGC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLSA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ESGC.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.19% | 3.14% | +1.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.53% | 12.36% | -1.83% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.40% | 14.48% | -2.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.67% | 16.54% | -3.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.73% | 16.54% | -3.81% |
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ESGC.TO has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSA.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
ESGC.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Dividend Comparison
ESGC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.13%, less than CLSA.TO's 10.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF | 10.76% | 7.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ESGC.TO Invesco S&P/TSX Composite ESG Index ETF | 2.13% | 2.34% | 2.60% | 3.23% | 2.98% | 2.28% | 0.67% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ESGC.TO and CLSA.TO have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ESGC.TO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ESGC.TO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CLSA.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Brompton Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for ESGC.TO and 0.60% for CLSA.TO.
Find the right allocation for ESGC.TO and CLSA.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