PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

FSF.TO (CI Global Financial Sector ETF) and DGR.TO (CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FSF.TO is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by CI, while DGR.TO is a Quality Factor fund tracking the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index CAD. FSF.TO is actively managed, while DGR.TO is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FSF.TO returned 30.36%/yr vs 11.97%/yr for DGR.TO. Their 0.24 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FSF.TO charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for DGR.TO.

Performance

FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in CI Global Financial Sector ETF (FSF.TO) and CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSF.TO achieves a 8.03% return, which is significantly higher than DGR.TO's 6.15% return. Over the past 10 years, FSF.TO has outperformed DGR.TO with an annualized return of 30.36%, while DGR.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 11.97% annualized return.

FSF.TO

1D
1.62%
1M
2.45%
6M
6.56%
YTD
8.03%
1Y
19.56%
3Y*
22.87%
5Y*
12.59%
10Y*
30.36%
ALL TIME*
14.13%

DGR.TO

1D
0.39%
1M
0.41%
6M
4.01%
YTD
6.15%
1Y
13.25%
3Y*
11.98%
5Y*
9.79%
10Y*
11.97%
ALL TIME*
11.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

DGR.TO

CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF
CA$32.50KCA$91.64KCA$88.11K

FSF.TO

CI Global Financial Sector ETF
CA$661.89CA$2.69KCA$6.54K

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FSF.TO
CI Global Financial Sector ETF		8.03%20.68%33.83%10.49%-11.77%30.71%-1.98%25.77%-21.19%23.28%
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%

Correlation

The correlation between FSF.TO and DGR.TO is 0.16, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

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

0.16

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

0.21

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

0.29

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

0.24

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

0.24

The correlation between FSF.TO and DGR.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (1 year) to 0.29 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
FSF.TO
DGR.TO

Financial Services

98.7%
8.4%

Industrials

1.0%
11.8%

Technology

0.3%
33.8%

Basic Materials

-

2.8%

Communication Services

-

11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

8.0%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.7%

Energy

-

4.5%

Healthcare

-

12.8%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

0.2%

Financial Services

FSF.TO
98.7%
DGR.TO
8.4%

Industrials

FSF.TO
1.0%
DGR.TO
11.8%

Technology

FSF.TO
0.3%
DGR.TO
33.8%

Basic Materials

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO
2.8%

Communication Services

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO
11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO
8.0%

Consumer Defensive

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO
6.7%

Energy

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO
4.5%

Healthcare

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO
12.8%

Real Estate

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO

-

Utilities

FSF.TO

-

DGR.TO
0.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

CI Global Financial Sector ETF

CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF

Often compared with FSF.TO:
FSF.TO vs. EHE.TOFSF.TO vs. CINF.TOFSF.TO vs. CGRE.TOFSF.TO vs. CMAG.TOFSF.TO vs. CAGG.TOFSF.TO vs. VXM-B.TOFSF.TO vs. CBCX.TO
Often compared with DGR.TO:
DGR.TO vs. EHE.TODGR.TO vs. ZZZD.TODGR.TO vs. ZUD.TODGR.TO vs. CINF.TODGR.TO vs. CMNY.TODGR.TO vs. VUDV.TODGR.TO vs. DXU.TO

Return for Risk

FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
FSF.TO
FSF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
FSF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
FSF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
DGR.TO
DGR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
DGR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
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.

FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Global Financial Sector ETF (FSF.TO) and CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.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.

FSF.TODGR.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.05
1.10

-0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.57
1.69

-0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.20

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.11

1.36

-0.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.27

5.26

-1.98

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

The current FSF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is comparable to the DGR.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSF.TO and DGR.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

FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSF.TO drawdown since its inception was -73.78%, which is greater than DGR.TO's maximum drawdown of -30.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSF.TO and DGR.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FSF.TODGR.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-73.78%

-30.73%

-43.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.09%

-8.55%

-6.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.26%

-16.65%

-0.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.08%

-17.92%

-8.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.78%

-30.73%

-43.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

-1.83%

+1.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.16%

-3.51%

-12.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.12%

2.21%

+2.91%

Volatility

FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO - Volatility Comparison

CI Global Financial Sector ETF (FSF.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.02% compared to CI U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index ETF (DGR.TO) at 2.72%. This indicates that FSF.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DGR.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FSF.TODGR.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.02%

2.72%

+2.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.20%

8.27%

+4.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.98%

10.55%

+5.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.34%

14.08%

+5.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

211.89%

15.21%

+196.68%

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

FSF.TO has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than DGR.TO's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

FSF.TO vs. DGR.TO - Dividend Comparison

FSF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than DGR.TO's 1.14% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
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%
FSF.TO
CI Global Financial Sector ETF		1.35%1.28%1.41%2.10%2.35%0.74%1.28%1.91%2.30%0.96%0.79%

Frequently Asked Questions

FSF.TO and DGR.TO have a correlation of 0.16, 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 0.99% for FSF.TO.

FSF.TO is categorized as Financials Equities, while DGR.TO is Quality Factor. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for FSF.TO and 0.38% for DGR.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FSF.TO and DGR.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