HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO
HEQT.TO (Horizons All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF) and CIF.TO (iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HEQT.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Horizons, while CIF.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index. HEQT.TO is actively managed, while CIF.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HEQT.TO returned 12.70%/yr vs 18.36%/yr for CIF.TO. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HEQT.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CIF.TO.
Performance
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HEQT.TO achieves a 13.37% return, which is significantly lower than CIF.TO's 25.11% return.
HEQT.TO
- 1D
- 0.59%
- 1M
- 2.47%
- YTD
- 13.37%
- 6M
- 13.85%
- 1Y
- 32.15%
- 3Y*
- 21.39%
- 5Y*
- 12.70%
- 10Y*
- —
CIF.TO
- 1D
- 1.09%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 25.11%
- 6M
- 18.12%
- 1Y
- 34.53%
- 3Y*
- 24.98%
- 5Y*
- 18.36%
- 10Y*
- 13.54%
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HEQT.TO Horizons All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF | 13.37% | 19.82% | 23.83% | 22.29% | -18.95% | 22.54% | 16.34% | 7.44% |
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF | 25.11% | 14.57% | 25.83% | 14.99% | 6.22% | 18.14% | -0.31% | 4.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between HEQT.TO and CIF.TO is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2019 | 0.58 |
The correlation between HEQT.TO and CIF.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
HEQT.TO
CIF.TO
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizons All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF (HEQT.TO) and iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.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.
| HEQT.TO | CIF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.34 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.41 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.60 | 3.64 | -0.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.68 | 12.99 | +2.69 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HEQT.TO drawdown since its inception was -31.82%, smaller than the maximum CIF.TO drawdown of -45.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HEQT.TO and CIF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HEQT.TO | CIF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.82% | -45.41% | +13.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.49% | -9.49% | +1.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.33% | -20.33% | +5.00% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.89% | -20.33% | -4.56% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -45.41% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.75% | -0.94% | +0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.17% | -9.75% | +4.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.95% | 2.65% | -0.70% |
Volatility
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO - Volatility Comparison
Horizons All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF (HEQT.TO) and iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) have volatilities of 4.92% and 5.07%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HEQT.TO | CIF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.92% | 5.07% | -0.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.45% | 12.85% | -2.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.59% | 15.50% | -2.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.98% | 15.16% | -0.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.90% | 25.97% | -9.07% |
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
HEQT.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CIF.TO's 0.72% expense ratio.
Dividends
HEQT.TO vs. CIF.TO - Dividend Comparison
HEQT.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, less than CIF.TO's 1.82% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF | 1.82% | 2.14% | 3.13% | 2.63% | 2.83% | 2.55% | 2.37% | 2.11% | 2.82% | 2.64% | 2.09% | 2.81% |
HEQT.TO Horizons All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF | 1.62% | 1.70% | 1.67% | 0.84% | 0.03% | 0.02% | 1.40% | 0.22% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HEQT.TO and CIF.TO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HEQT.TO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HEQT.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CIF.TO.
HEQT.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while CIF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Horizons and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for HEQT.TO and 0.72% for CIF.TO.
Find the right allocation for HEQT.TO and CIF.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