HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO
HUC.TO (Global X Crude Oil ETF) and CBIL.TO (Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HUC.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER, while CBIL.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund actively managed by Global X. HUC.TO is passively managed, while CBIL.TO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, HUC.TO returned 12.31%/yr vs 3.63%/yr for CBIL.TO. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. HUC.TO charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for CBIL.TO.
Performance
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HUC.TO achieves a 45.00% return, which is significantly higher than CBIL.TO's 0.85% return.
HUC.TO
- 1D
- 1.46%
- 1M
- -1.28%
- YTD
- 45.00%
- 6M
- 41.59%
- 1Y
- 40.27%
- 3Y*
- 12.31%
- 5Y*
- 13.32%
- 10Y*
- 8.61%
CBIL.TO
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 0.85%
- 6M
- 1.08%
- 1Y
- 2.34%
- 3Y*
- 3.63%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
HUC.TO Global X Crude Oil ETF | 45.00% | -13.63% | 7.23% | -5.12% |
CBIL.TO Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 0.85% | 2.68% | 4.47% | 3.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between HUC.TO and CBIL.TO is -0.05, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2023 | -0.04 |
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
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO — Risk / Return Rank
HUC.TO
CBIL.TO
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) and Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.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.
| HUC.TO | CBIL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -7.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -21.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 5.38 | -4.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.50 | 58.74 | -56.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.94 | 339.60 | -334.66 |
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
| HUC.TO | CBIL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.60 | 9.47 | -7.87 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.48 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.30 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.13 | 11.64 | -11.50 |
Drawdowns
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HUC.TO drawdown since its inception was -76.99%, which is greater than CBIL.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUC.TO and CBIL.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HUC.TO | CBIL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -76.99% | -0.06% | -76.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.20% | -0.04% | -16.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.83% | -0.06% | -23.77% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.83% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -61.56% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.80% | 0.00% | -2.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -34.61% | -0.00% | -34.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.17% | 0.01% | +8.16% |
Volatility
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Volatility Comparison
Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) has a higher volatility of 11.26% compared to Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.TO) at 0.08%. This indicates that HUC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBIL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HUC.TO | CBIL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.26% | 0.08% | +11.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.17% | 0.19% | +20.98% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.36% | 0.25% | +25.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.85% | 0.31% | +27.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.04% | 0.31% | +28.73% |
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
HUC.TO has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than CBIL.TO's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
HUC.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Dividend Comparison
HUC.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBIL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.29%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CBIL.TO Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 2.29% | 2.59% | 4.38% | 3.39% |
HUC.TO Global X Crude Oil ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HUC.TO and CBIL.TO have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CBIL.TO is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CBIL.TO is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for HUC.TO.
HUC.TO is categorized as Commodities, while CBIL.TO is Canadian Government Bonds. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for HUC.TO and 0.10% for CBIL.TO.
Find the right allocation for HUC.TO and CBIL.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