PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO

Last updated Jul 18, 2026
Documentation

HUM.TO (Hamilton U.S. Mid-Cap Financials ETF) and XMC.TO (iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HUM.TO is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Hamilton, while XMC.TO is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US SMID TR CAD. HUM.TO is actively managed, while XMC.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HUM.TO returned 9.59%/yr vs 11.12%/yr for XMC.TO. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Hamilton U.S. Mid-Cap Financials ETF (HUM.TO) and iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (XMC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HUM.TO achieves a 4.67% return, which is significantly lower than XMC.TO's 17.19% return.

HUM.TO

1D
0.63%
1M
4.74%
6M
2.45%
YTD
4.67%
1Y
6.69%
3Y*
16.12%
5Y*
9.59%
10Y*
—

XMC.TO

1D
-0.61%
1M
0.02%
6M
8.97%
YTD
17.19%
1Y
22.46%
3Y*
15.22%
5Y*
11.12%
10Y*
11.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
HUM.TO
Hamilton U.S. Mid-Cap Financials ETF		4.67%4.39%12.82%23.80%-11.26%41.41%-7.33%25.28%-26.84%
XMC.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF		17.19%2.37%22.99%13.65%-7.61%23.39%11.11%20.90%-14.76%

Correlation

The correlation between HUM.TO and XMC.TO is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.18

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

0.25

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

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2018

0.35

The correlation between HUM.TO and XMC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.18 (1 year) to 0.35 (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.

Hamilton U.S. Mid-Cap Financials ETF

iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF

Often compared with HUM.TO:
HUM.TO vs. ZMID.TOHUM.TO vs. HBA.TOHUM.TO vs. HEB.TOHUM.TO vs. BNKL.TOHUM.TO vs. CBNK.TOHUM.TO vs. CEW.TOHUM.TO vs. CFOU.TO
Often compared with XMC.TO:
XMC.TO vs. XSMC.TOXMC.TO vs. ZEB.TOXMC.TO vs. XSP.TOXMC.TO vs. XSMOXMC.TO vs. IMCGXMC.TO vs. FMDEXMC.TO vs. VOE

Return for Risk

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HUM.TO
HUM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
HUM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HUM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
HUM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
HUM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
HUM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank
XMC.TO
XMC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
XMC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
XMC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hamilton U.S. Mid-Cap Financials ETF (HUM.TO) and iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (XMC.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.

HUM.TOXMC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.47
1.43

-0.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.78
2.16

-1.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.26

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.56

2.72

-2.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.37

9.85

-8.48

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HUM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.47, which is lower than the XMC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUM.TO and XMC.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...

Drawdowns

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUM.TO drawdown since its inception was -49.06%, which is greater than XMC.TO's maximum drawdown of -36.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUM.TO and XMC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HUM.TOXMC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.06%

-36.38%

-12.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.68%

-8.28%

-6.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-31.97%

-22.70%

-9.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.43%

-22.70%

-11.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-36.38%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.14%

-3.24%

-9.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.32%

-5.00%

-10.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.00%

2.29%

+3.71%

Volatility

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO - Volatility Comparison

Hamilton U.S. Mid-Cap Financials ETF (HUM.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.36% compared to iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (XMC.TO) at 3.44%. This indicates that HUM.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HUM.TOXMC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.36%

3.44%

+0.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.63%

11.76%

+0.87%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.62%

15.81%

+1.81%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

62.07%

17.67%

+44.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

63.44%

18.58%

+44.86%

Dividends

HUM.TO vs. XMC.TO - Dividend Comparison

HUM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%, more than XMC.TO's 0.91% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HUM.TO
Hamilton U.S. Mid-Cap Financials ETF		1.26%1.26%1.19%1.35%3.58%2.18%0.68%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XMC.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF		0.91%1.10%0.94%1.17%1.27%0.99%1.07%1.43%1.57%0.98%1.06%0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

HUM.TO and XMC.TO have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HUM.TO is categorized as Financials Equities, while XMC.TO is Mid Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Hamilton and iShares.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HUM.TO and XMC.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