PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in IA Clarington Loomis Floating Rate Income Fund (IFRF.TO) and IA Clarington Strategic Income Fund (ISIF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFRF.TO achieves a 1.18% return, which is significantly lower than ISIF.TO's 6.17% return.


IFRF.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.52%
6M
0.79%
YTD
1.18%
1Y
1.55%
3Y*
2.46%
5Y*
1.67%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
1.63%

ISIF.TO

1D
-0.37%
1M
0.68%
6M
5.28%
YTD
6.17%
1Y
10.95%
3Y*
11.09%
5Y*
7.01%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
7.42%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$79.18CA$1.23KCA$15.94K
CA$409.30CA$5.79KCA$2.57K

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IFRF.TO
IA Clarington Loomis Floating Rate Income Fund
1.18%0.01%2.53%7.67%-4.29%3.42%-0.18%0.97%
ISIF.TO
IA Clarington Strategic Income Fund
6.17%12.42%11.91%6.17%-5.63%17.60%0.18%2.55%

Correlation

The correlation between IFRF.TO and ISIF.TO is 0.08, 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

0.08

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

0.08

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

0.08

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2019

0.07

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

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IFRF.TO
IFRF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
IFRF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IFRF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
IFRF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
IFRF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
IFRF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank

ISIF.TO
ISIF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
ISIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
ISIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IA Clarington Loomis Floating Rate Income Fund (IFRF.TO) and IA Clarington Strategic Income Fund (ISIF.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.


IFRF.TOISIF.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.32

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.93

2.49

-1.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.02

10.30

-8.28

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFRF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.42, which is lower than the ISIF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFRF.TO and ISIF.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

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFRF.TO drawdown since its inception was -21.67%, which is greater than ISIF.TO's maximum drawdown of -18.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFRF.TO and ISIF.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IFRF.TOISIF.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.67%

-18.65%

-3.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.67%

-4.64%

+2.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.61%

-8.40%

+3.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-6.54%

-11.47%

+4.93%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.58%

+0.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.05%

-3.04%

+0.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.77%

1.12%

-0.35%

Volatility

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for IA Clarington Loomis Floating Rate Income Fund (IFRF.TO) is 1.05%, while IA Clarington Strategic Income Fund (ISIF.TO) has a volatility of 5.06%. This indicates that IFRF.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISIF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IFRF.TOISIF.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.05%

5.06%

-4.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.66%

6.64%

-3.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.70%

7.48%

-3.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.51%

9.60%

-5.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.81%

10.25%

-1.44%

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFRF.TO has a 0.93% expense ratio, which is lower than ISIF.TO's 0.94% expense ratio.


Dividends

IFRF.TO vs. ISIF.TO - Dividend Comparison

IFRF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.95%, more than ISIF.TO's 2.78% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
IFRF.TO
IA Clarington Loomis Floating Rate Income Fund
6.95%6.91%7.69%7.74%5.66%3.88%3.36%0.47%
ISIF.TO
IA Clarington Strategic Income Fund
2.78%2.83%2.85%2.58%2.98%1.59%2.68%0.44%

Frequently Asked Questions


IFRF.TO and ISIF.TO have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IFRF.TO is cheaper at 0.93% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IFRF.TO is cheaper with a 0.93% expense ratio, compared with 0.94% for ISIF.TO.

IFRF.TO is categorized as Bank Loan, while ISIF.TO is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.93% for IFRF.TO and 0.94% for ISIF.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IFRF.TO and ISIF.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