PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


GBAL.TO

1D
0.16%
1M
5.46%
YTD
9.39%
6M
7.35%
1Y
18.03%
3Y*
15.66%
5Y*
9.04%
10Y*

CSBG.NEO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
0.00%
6M
0.00%
1Y
0.00%
3Y*
0.80%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GBAL.TO
iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio
9.39%11.77%17.38%14.48%-11.94%3.53%
CSBG.NEO
CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF
0.00%0.00%1.17%1.22%1.69%2.60%

Correlation

The correlation between GBAL.TO and CSBG.NEO is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 20, 2021

0.01

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

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GBAL.TO
GBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
GBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
GBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
GBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
GBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

CSBG.NEO
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.

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.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.


GBAL.TOCSBG.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.25

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GBAL.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.03

1.08

-0.05

Drawdowns

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBAL.TO drawdown since its inception was -18.92%, which is greater than CSBG.NEO's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBAL.TO and CSBG.NEO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GBAL.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.92%

0.00%

-18.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.40%

0.00%

-6.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.24%

0.00%

-10.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.08%

0.00%

-0.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.30%

0.00%

-4.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.61%

0.00%

+1.61%

Volatility

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.19% compared to CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO) at 0.00%. This indicates that GBAL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSBG.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GBAL.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.19%

0.00%

+3.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.87%

0.00%

+7.87%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.42%

0.00%

+9.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.70%

1.27%

+8.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.53%

1.27%

+8.26%

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GBAL.TO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CSBG.NEO's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

GBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Dividend Comparison

GBAL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, while CSBG.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CSBG.NEO
CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF
0.00%0.00%1.16%1.21%1.66%0.00%0.00%
GBAL.TO
iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio
1.71%1.83%1.84%2.40%1.87%1.43%0.96%

Frequently Asked Questions


GBAL.TO and CSBG.NEO have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, GBAL.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

GBAL.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and CIBC. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GBAL.TO and 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GBAL.TO and CSBG.NEO

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