PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HUC.TO (Global X Crude Oil ETF) and XEB.TO (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) 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 XEB.TO is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Hedged in CAD Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HUC.TO returned 8.13%/yr vs 1.44%/yr for XEB.TO. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HUC.TO charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for XEB.TO.

Performance

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XEB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUC.TO achieves a 42.05% return, which is significantly higher than XEB.TO's 0.81% return. Over the past 10 years, HUC.TO has outperformed XEB.TO with an annualized return of 8.13%, while XEB.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 1.44% annualized return.

HUC.TO

1D
-2.03%
1M
-1.85%
YTD
42.05%
6M
37.99%
1Y
37.42%
3Y*
11.54%
5Y*
12.86%
10Y*
8.13%

XEB.TO

1D
0.18%
1M
0.79%
YTD
0.81%
6M
0.94%
1Y
8.75%
3Y*
7.28%
5Y*
-0.04%
10Y*
1.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HUC.TO
Global X Crude Oil ETF		42.05%-13.63%7.23%-2.89%26.25%57.81%-21.10%19.75%-11.68%-3.47%
XEB.TO
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.81%11.14%3.46%8.58%-19.80%-3.14%2.97%13.37%-7.43%8.80%

Correlation

The correlation between HUC.TO and XEB.TO is -0.35, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.35

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

-0.12

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.00

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2011

0.13

The correlation between HUC.TO and XEB.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.35 (1 year) to 0.13 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Global X Crude Oil ETF

iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with HUC.TO:
HUC.TO vs. HXS.TOHUC.TO vs. HUN.TOHUC.TO vs. XBM.TOHUC.TO vs. CCOM.TOHUC.TO vs. ZCOM.NEOHUC.TO vs. COW.TOHUC.TO vs. PPA
Often compared with XEB.TO:
XEB.TO vs. TDB.TOXEB.TO vs. XCB.TOXEB.TO vs. XLB.TOXEB.TO vs. ZAG.TOXEB.TO vs. VBG.NEOXEB.TO vs. XIC.TOXEB.TO vs. XUS.TO

Return for Risk

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HUC.TO
HUC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
XEB.TO
XEB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
XEB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XEB.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.TOXEB.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.48
1.42

+0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.97
2.10

-0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.28

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.32

1.78

+0.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.59

6.91

-2.32

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is comparable to the XEB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUC.TO and XEB.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

HUC.TOXEB.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.48

1.42

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

-0.00

+0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.28

0.14

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.13

0.30

-0.17

Drawdowns

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUC.TO drawdown since its inception was -76.99%, which is greater than XEB.TO's maximum drawdown of -29.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUC.TO and XEB.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HUC.TOXEB.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-76.99%

-29.53%

-47.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.20%

-4.94%

-11.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.83%

-8.26%

-15.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.83%

-29.47%

-1.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.56%

-29.53%

-32.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.77%

-2.23%

-2.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-34.60%

-6.46%

-28.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.18%

1.27%

+6.91%

Volatility

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Volatility Comparison

Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) has a higher volatility of 11.36% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XEB.TO) at 2.47%. This indicates that HUC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XEB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HUC.TOXEB.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.36%

2.47%

+8.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.24%

4.89%

+16.35%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.42%

6.17%

+19.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.87%

9.52%

+18.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

29.04%

10.21%

+18.83%

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HUC.TO has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than XEB.TO's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

HUC.TO vs. XEB.TO - Dividend Comparison

HUC.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XEB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.97%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HUC.TO
Global X Crude Oil ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XEB.TO
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		4.97%4.98%4.68%4.00%4.26%3.23%3.45%3.65%4.95%3.81%4.31%4.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

HUC.TO and XEB.TO have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XEB.TO is cheaper at 0.53% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEB.TO is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for HUC.TO.

HUC.TO is categorized as Commodities, while XEB.TO is Emerging Markets Bonds. HUC.TO tracks Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER, while XEB.TO tracks J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Hedged in CAD Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for HUC.TO and 0.53% for XEB.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HUC.TO and XEB.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