FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

FCIV.TO (Fidelity International Value ETF) and XML.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - FCIV.TO tracks the Fidelity Canada International Value Index while XML.TO tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FCIV.TO returned 16.79%/yr vs 9.98%/yr for XML.TO. Their 0.34 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FCIV.TO charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for XML.TO.

Performance

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Fidelity International Value ETF (FCIV.TO) and iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCIV.TO achieves a 21.38% return, which is significantly higher than XML.TO's 11.20% return.

FCIV.TO

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 1.83%
• 6M: 10.82%
• YTD: 21.38%
• 1Y: 36.56%
• 3Y*: 22.55%
• 5Y*: 16.79%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.34%

XML.TO

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: 4.79%
• 6M: 8.74%
• YTD: 11.20%
• 1Y: 18.46%
• 3Y*: 14.92%
• 5Y*: 9.98%
• 10Y*: 7.84%
• ALL TIME*: 7.88%

*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)
FCIV.TO Fidelity International Value ETF	CA$1.12M	CA$1.36M	CA$2.02M
XML.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	CA$8.48K	CA$7.87K	CA$8.75K

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FCIV.TO Fidelity International Value ETF	21.38%	33.60%	6.89%	22.75%	-0.22%	14.15%	4.49%
XML.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	11.20%	17.56%	14.13%	11.69%	-6.94%	13.27%	2.75%

Correlation

The correlation between FCIV.TO and XML.TO is 0.37, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2020	0.34

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FCIV.TO	XML.TO
Financial Services	31.0%	19.7%
Energy	11.8%	7.7%
Industrials	11.1%	15.7%
Consumer Defensive	10.1%	12.6%
Real Estate	8.5%	2.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	5.1%
Technology	6.5%	4.4%
Healthcare	3.2%	12.2%
Communication Services	1.2%	9.1%
Basic Materials	-	1.6%
Utilities	-	9.0%

Return for Risk

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCIV.TO

FCIV.TO Risk / Return Rank: 91
FCIV.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
FCIV.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
FCIV.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 91
FCIV.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
FCIV.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 91

XML.TO

XML.TO Risk / Return Rank: 77
XML.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
XML.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
XML.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 87
XML.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
XML.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity International Value ETF (FCIV.TO) and iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.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.

	FCIV.TO	XML.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.45	1.93	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.23	2.74	+0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.41	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	2.79	+1.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.74	8.69	+7.05

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCIV.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is comparable to the XML.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCIV.TO and XML.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

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCIV.TO drawdown since its inception was -24.27%, smaller than the maximum XML.TO drawdown of -28.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCIV.TO and XML.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCIV.TO	XML.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.27%	-28.62%	+4.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.59%	-6.46%	-2.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.59%	-7.46%	-9.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.27%	-12.34%	-11.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.62%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.29%	-0.35%	+0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.01%	-3.42%	-0.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.28%	2.07%	+0.21%

Volatility

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity International Value ETF (FCIV.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.97% compared to iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) at 2.05%. This indicates that FCIV.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XML.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCIV.TO	XML.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.97%	2.05%	+1.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.17%	7.83%	+3.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.66%	9.32%	+5.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.26%	9.82%	+5.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.47%	11.93%	+3.54%

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCIV.TO has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than XML.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCIV.TO vs. XML.TO - Dividend Comparison

FCIV.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.06%, less than XML.TO's 2.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FCIV.TO Fidelity International Value ETF	2.06%	2.09%	2.80%	3.64%	3.45%	2.97%	0.90%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XML.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	2.61%	2.76%	2.67%	2.56%	2.02%	1.92%	1.11%	3.62%	2.79%	1.91%	3.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCIV.TO and XML.TO in my portfolio?

FCIV.TO and XML.TO have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FCIV.TO or XML.TO?

On fees, XML.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCIV.TO or XML.TO?

XML.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FCIV.TO.

What is the main difference between FCIV.TO and XML.TO?

FCIV.TO tracks Fidelity Canada International Value Index, while XML.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FCIV.TO and 0.40% for XML.TO.