GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO
GCNS.TO (iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio) and MGRW.TO (Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GCNS.TO returned 6.92%/yr vs 12.14%/yr for MGRW.TO. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GCNS.TO achieves a 6.84% return, which is significantly lower than MGRW.TO's 9.90% return.
GCNS.TO
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 4.64%
- YTD
- 6.84%
- 6M
- 5.63%
- 1Y
- 13.41%
- 3Y*
- 12.23%
- 5Y*
- 6.92%
- 10Y*
- —
MGRW.TO
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 4.67%
- YTD
- 9.90%
- 6M
- 10.22%
- 1Y
- 25.89%
- 3Y*
- 19.61%
- 5Y*
- 12.14%
- 10Y*
- —
GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GCNS.TO iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio | 6.84% | 7.23% | 15.54% | 11.66% | -10.94% | 8.07% | 4.37% |
MGRW.TO Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF | 9.90% | 18.19% | 21.41% | 15.35% | -9.30% | 13.37% | 7.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between GCNS.TO and MGRW.TO is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2020 | 0.39 |
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
GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO — Risk / Return Rank
GCNS.TO
MGRW.TO
GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (GCNS.TO) and Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF (MGRW.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.
| GCNS.TO | MGRW.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.56 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.80 | 3.87 | -1.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.32 | 15.91 | -6.60 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GCNS.TO | MGRW.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.59 | 2.64 | -1.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 | 1.14 | -0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.92 | 1.25 | -0.33 |
Drawdowns
GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GCNS.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.37%, smaller than the maximum MGRW.TO drawdown of -17.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCNS.TO and MGRW.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GCNS.TO | MGRW.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.37% | -17.20% | +1.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.81% | -6.72% | +1.91% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.38% | -12.17% | +4.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.37% | -17.20% | +1.83% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.56% | -3.37% | -0.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.44% | 1.63% | -0.19% |
Volatility
GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (GCNS.TO) is 2.47%, while Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF (MGRW.TO) has a volatility of 3.39%. This indicates that GCNS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MGRW.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GCNS.TO | MGRW.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.47% | 3.39% | -0.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.59% | 8.09% | -2.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.49% | 9.87% | -1.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.20% | 10.68% | -2.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.83% | 10.49% | -2.66% |
Dividends
GCNS.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Dividend Comparison
GCNS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, more than MGRW.TO's 1.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GCNS.TO iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio | 1.98% | 2.07% | 2.03% | 2.88% | 2.09% | 1.60% | 2.49% |
MGRW.TO Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF | 1.73% | 1.84% | 1.93% | 2.28% | 2.44% | 1.77% | 0.79% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GCNS.TO and MGRW.TO have a correlation of 0.42, 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: iShares and Mackenzie.
Find the right allocation for GCNS.TO and MGRW.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