PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Franklin International Equity Index ETF (FLUR.NEO) and Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with FLUR.NEO having a 10.14% return and QDX.TO slightly higher at 10.16%.


FLUR.NEO

1D
-0.65%
1M
4.00%
YTD
10.14%
6M
10.78%
1Y
23.20%
3Y*
18.11%
5Y*
11.12%
10Y*

QDX.TO

1D
-0.28%
1M
5.44%
YTD
10.16%
6M
10.81%
1Y
23.43%
3Y*
17.81%
5Y*
11.33%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FLUR.NEO
Franklin International Equity Index ETF
10.14%25.68%12.42%12.87%-9.30%14.74%9.77%14.40%
QDX.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF
10.16%25.29%12.93%13.66%-8.61%11.24%5.06%13.08%

Correlation

The correlation between FLUR.NEO and QDX.TO is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.87

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2019

0.57

Over the past year, FLUR.NEO and QDX.TO have become more correlated (0.86) than their long-term average of 0.57, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLUR.NEO
FLUR.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
FLUR.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLUR.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLUR.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
FLUR.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLUR.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank

QDX.TO
QDX.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
QDX.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin International Equity Index ETF (FLUR.NEO) and Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.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.


FLUR.NEOQDX.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.30

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.08

2.16

-0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.04

8.46

-0.41

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLUR.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is comparable to the QDX.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLUR.NEO and QDX.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLUR.NEOQDX.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.58

1.65

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

0.82

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

0.56

+0.16

Drawdowns

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLUR.NEO drawdown since its inception was -30.20%, which is greater than QDX.TO's maximum drawdown of -28.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLUR.NEO and QDX.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLUR.NEOQDX.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.20%

-28.08%

-2.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.21%

-10.88%

-0.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.64%

-14.25%

-0.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.55%

-23.00%

-3.55%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.15%

-0.72%

-1.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.83%

-4.54%

-0.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.89%

2.78%

+0.11%

Volatility

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Volatility Comparison

Franklin International Equity Index ETF (FLUR.NEO) has a higher volatility of 5.55% compared to Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.TO) at 4.80%. This indicates that FLUR.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDX.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLUR.NEOQDX.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.55%

4.80%

+0.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.27%

12.00%

-0.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.75%

14.28%

+0.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.01%

13.94%

+1.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.96%

15.48%

+1.48%

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLUR.NEO has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is higher than QDX.TO's 0.17% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FLUR.NEO vs. QDX.TO - Dividend Comparison

FLUR.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.18%, less than QDX.TO's 2.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
FLUR.NEO
Franklin International Equity Index ETF
2.18%2.40%2.76%2.71%4.16%1.85%1.97%3.07%0.00%
QDX.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF
2.63%2.51%2.48%2.61%2.73%2.25%1.91%2.76%3.03%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLUR.NEO and QDX.TO have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QDX.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QDX.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for FLUR.NEO.

FLUR.NEO tracks Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD Index-NR, while QDX.TO tracks Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Mackenzie. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for FLUR.NEO and 0.17% for QDX.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLUR.NEO and QDX.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