GCNS.TO vs. XSP.TO
GCNS.TO (iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio) and XSP.TO (iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - GCNS.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by iShares, while XSP.TO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. GCNS.TO is actively managed, while XSP.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GCNS.TO returned 6.92%/yr vs 12.18%/yr for XSP.TO. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GCNS.TO charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for XSP.TO.
Performance
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.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 XSP.TO's 9.64% 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*
- —
XSP.TO
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- 4.98%
- YTD
- 9.64%
- 6M
- 9.50%
- 1Y
- 25.13%
- 3Y*
- 20.28%
- 5Y*
- 12.18%
- 10Y*
- 13.79%
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.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% |
XSP.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 9.64% | 15.68% | 23.39% | 24.33% | -19.32% | 27.85% | 14.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between GCNS.TO and XSP.TO is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2020 | 0.20 |
The correlation between GCNS.TO and XSP.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.18 (3 years) to 0.29 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Communication Services
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Energy
-
Technology
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Financial Services
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Industrials
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Basic Materials
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Consumer Cyclical
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Healthcare
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Communication Services
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Real Estate
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Consumer Defensive
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Utilities
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
Energy
GCNS.TO
-
XSP.TO
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. XSP.TO — Risk / Return Rank
GCNS.TO
XSP.TO
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.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 iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XSP.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 | XSP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.39 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.80 | 2.68 | +0.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.32 | 12.40 | -3.08 |
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 | XSP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.59 | 2.15 | -0.56 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 | 0.73 | +0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.76 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.92 | 0.37 | +0.55 |
Drawdowns
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GCNS.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.37%, smaller than the maximum XSP.TO drawdown of -57.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCNS.TO and XSP.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GCNS.TO | XSP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.37% | -57.82% | +42.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.81% | -9.41% | +4.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.38% | -18.77% | +11.39% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.37% | -25.44% | +10.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.05% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.73% | +0.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.56% | -12.11% | +8.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.44% | 2.03% | -0.59% |
Volatility
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (GCNS.TO) is 2.47%, while iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XSP.TO) has a volatility of 3.25%. This indicates that GCNS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XSP.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GCNS.TO | XSP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.47% | 3.25% | -0.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.59% | 8.99% | -3.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.49% | 11.75% | -3.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.20% | 16.75% | -8.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.83% | 18.19% | -10.36% |
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
GCNS.TO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XSP.TO's 0.09% 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
GCNS.TO vs. XSP.TO - Dividend Comparison
GCNS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, more than XSP.TO's 1.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GCNS.TO iShares ESG Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio | 1.98% | 2.07% | 2.03% | 2.88% | 2.09% | 1.60% | 2.49% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XSP.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 1.12% | 1.23% | 1.09% | 1.18% | 1.37% | 1.00% | 1.31% | 1.73% | 1.84% | 1.47% | 1.75% | 1.86% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GCNS.TO and XSP.TO have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XSP.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XSP.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for GCNS.TO.
GCNS.TO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while XSP.TO is S&P 500. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GCNS.TO and 0.09% for XSP.TO.
Find the right allocation for GCNS.TO and XSP.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