FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO
FSF.TO (CI Global Financial Sector ETF) and HBNK.TO (Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. FSF.TO is actively managed, while HBNK.TO is passively managed. Over the past year, FSF.TO returned 13.30% vs 70.95% for HBNK.TO. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FSF.TO achieves a 2.28% return, which is significantly lower than HBNK.TO's 31.79% return.
FSF.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 5.48%
- YTD
- 2.28%
- 6M
- 2.00%
- 1Y
- 13.30%
- 3Y*
- 22.27%
- 5Y*
- 11.37%
- 10Y*
- 21.70%
HBNK.TO
- 1D
- 0.49%
- 1M
- 10.91%
- YTD
- 31.79%
- 6M
- 31.23%
- 1Y
- 70.95%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FSF.TO CI Global Financial Sector ETF | 2.28% | 20.68% | 33.83% | 9.68% |
HBNK.TO Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF | 31.79% | 43.71% | 24.77% | 9.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between FSF.TO and HBNK.TO is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 7, 2023 | 0.25 |
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
FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO — Risk / Return Rank
FSF.TO
HBNK.TO
FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CI Global Financial Sector ETF (FSF.TO) and Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (HBNK.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.TO | HBNK.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.65 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 2.00 | -0.83 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.89 | 8.41 | -7.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.61 | 36.58 | -33.98 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FSF.TO drawdown since its inception was -73.78%, which is greater than HBNK.TO's maximum drawdown of -14.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSF.TO and HBNK.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FSF.TO | HBNK.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -73.78% | -14.78% | -59.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.09% | -8.48% | -6.61% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.26% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.08% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -73.78% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.76% | 0.00% | -1.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.28% | -2.27% | -14.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.12% | 1.95% | +3.17% |
Volatility
FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO - Volatility Comparison
CI Global Financial Sector ETF (FSF.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.41% compared to Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (HBNK.TO) at 3.52%. This indicates that FSF.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HBNK.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FSF.TO | HBNK.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.41% | 3.52% | +0.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.90% | 11.29% | +1.61% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.54% | 12.96% | +2.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.34% | 12.69% | +6.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 212.69% | 12.69% | +200.00% |
Dividends
FSF.TO vs. HBNK.TO - Dividend Comparison
FSF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, less than HBNK.TO's 2.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSF.TO CI Global Financial Sector ETF | 1.43% | 1.28% | 1.41% | 2.10% | 2.35% | 0.74% | 1.28% | 1.91% | 2.30% | 0.96% | 0.79% |
HBNK.TO Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF | 2.35% | 3.24% | 4.15% | 2.45% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FSF.TO and HBNK.TO have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
They also come from different issuers: CI and Global X.
Find the right allocation for FSF.TO and HBNK.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