FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FCUQ.TO (Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF) and CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - FCUQ.TO tracks the Fidelity Canada U.S. High Quality Index while CLU.NEO tracks the FTSE RAFI US 1000 Canadian Dollar Hedged Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FCUQ.TO returned 14.68%/yr vs 9.30%/yr for CLU.NEO. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCUQ.TO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CLU.NEO.

Performance

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF (FCUQ.TO) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCUQ.TO achieves a 7.92% return, which is significantly lower than CLU.NEO's 8.69% return.

FCUQ.TO

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 8.68%
• YTD: 7.92%
• 6M: 4.08%
• 1Y: 14.01%
• 3Y*: 18.73%
• 5Y*: 14.68%
• 10Y*: —

CLU.NEO

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 1.48%
• YTD: 8.69%
• 6M: 10.24%
• 1Y: 25.16%
• 3Y*: 16.95%
• 5Y*: 9.30%
• 10Y*: 11.02%

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

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FCUQ.TO Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF	7.92%	4.67%	32.89%	20.05%	-11.48%	31.73%	13.51%	24.22%
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class	8.69%	15.20%	14.82%	13.13%	-9.37%	31.13%	3.57%	18.54%

Correlation

The correlation between FCUQ.TO and CLU.NEO is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.51
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2019	0.48

The correlation between FCUQ.TO and CLU.NEO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FCUQ.TO

FCUQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 31
FCUQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FCUQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FCUQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FCUQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
FCUQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 27

CLU.NEO

CLU.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 81
CLU.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
CLU.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CLU.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 87
CLU.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
CLU.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF (FCUQ.TO) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO). 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.

	FCUQ.TO	CLU.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	2.50	-1.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.78	3.77	-1.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.54	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.16	3.86	-2.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.79	14.84	-11.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCUQ.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the CLU.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCUQ.TO and CLU.NEO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FCUQ.TO	CLU.NEO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.23	2.50	-1.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.01	0.64	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.61	+0.31

Drawdowns

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCUQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.36%, smaller than the maximum CLU.NEO drawdown of -39.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCUQ.TO and CLU.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCUQ.TO	CLU.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.36%	-39.93%	+14.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.14%	-6.55%	-5.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.48%	-16.57%	+0.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.73%	-20.66%	-2.07%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.93%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.47%	-0.70%	+0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.29%	-4.74%	+0.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.70%	1.70%	+2.00%

Volatility

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF (FCUQ.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.37% compared to iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) at 2.30%. This indicates that FCUQ.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLU.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCUQ.TO	CLU.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.37%	2.30%	+1.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.46%	7.24%	+2.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.49%	10.11%	+1.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.62%	14.54%	+0.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.31%	18.08%	-0.77%

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCUQ.TO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CLU.NEO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Dividend Comparison

FCUQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, less than CLU.NEO's 1.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class	1.20%	1.31%	1.32%	1.35%	1.63%	1.19%	1.66%	1.46%	1.77%	1.46%	1.63%	1.87%
FCUQ.TO Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF	0.67%	0.73%	0.77%	0.88%	1.04%	0.79%	1.15%	0.82%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCUQ.TO and CLU.NEO in my portfolio?

FCUQ.TO and CLU.NEO have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FCUQ.TO or CLU.NEO?

On fees, FCUQ.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, FCUQ.TO or CLU.NEO?

FCUQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.

What is the main difference between FCUQ.TO and CLU.NEO?

FCUQ.TO tracks Fidelity Canada U.S. High Quality Index, while CLU.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI US 1000 Canadian Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FCUQ.TO and 0.72% for CLU.NEO.