LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

LEAD.TO (Evolve Future Leadership Fund) and ONEQ.TO (CI Global Core Plus Equity ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, LEAD.TO returned 5.58%/yr vs 13.60%/yr for ONEQ.TO. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LEAD.TO charges 0.92%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for ONEQ.TO.

Performance

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Evolve Future Leadership Fund (LEAD.TO) and CI Global Core Plus Equity ETF (ONEQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LEAD.TO achieves a -4.13% return, which is significantly lower than ONEQ.TO's 15.60% return.

LEAD.TO

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: 1.87%
• 6M: -0.68%
• YTD: -4.13%
• 1Y: -3.93%
• 3Y*: 18.17%
• 5Y*: 5.58%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.63%

ONEQ.TO

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 3.13%
• 6M: 11.95%
• YTD: 15.60%
• 1Y: 26.84%
• 3Y*: 20.76%
• 5Y*: 13.60%
• 10Y*: 11.95%
• ALL TIME*: 11.69%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
LEAD.TO Evolve Future Leadership Fund	CA$5.33K	CA$6.18K	CA$7.84K
ONEQ.TO CI Global Core Plus Equity ETF	CA$4.13K	CA$98.93K	CA$51.56K

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
LEAD.TO Evolve Future Leadership Fund	-4.13%	12.13%	38.23%	34.98%	-34.79%	14.98%	7.95%
ONEQ.TO CI Global Core Plus Equity ETF	15.60%	17.62%	22.45%	19.07%	-10.74%	21.65%	13.10%

Correlation

The correlation between LEAD.TO and ONEQ.TO is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.38
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2020	0.40

Return for Risk

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEAD.TO

LEAD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 10
LEAD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
LEAD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
LEAD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9
LEAD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
LEAD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 10

ONEQ.TO

ONEQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 92
ONEQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
ONEQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
ONEQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 93
ONEQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
ONEQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Evolve Future Leadership Fund (LEAD.TO) and CI Global Core Plus Equity ETF (ONEQ.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.

	LEAD.TO	ONEQ.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.18	2.32	-2.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.12	3.35	-3.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.46	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.15	4.19	-4.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.33	18.46	-18.78

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEAD.TO Sharpe Ratio is -0.18, which is lower than the ONEQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEAD.TO and ONEQ.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.

Drawdowns

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEAD.TO drawdown since its inception was -39.80%, which is greater than ONEQ.TO's maximum drawdown of -34.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEAD.TO and ONEQ.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	LEAD.TO	ONEQ.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.80%	-34.40%	-5.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.65%	-6.66%	-15.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.65%	-16.08%	-6.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.80%	-17.61%	-22.19%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.30%	0.00%	-9.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.81%	-3.69%	-10.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.12%	1.51%	+8.61%

Volatility

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

Evolve Future Leadership Fund (LEAD.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.40% compared to CI Global Core Plus Equity ETF (ONEQ.TO) at 3.03%. This indicates that LEAD.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ONEQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LEAD.TO	ONEQ.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.40%	3.03%	+2.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.99%	9.81%	+5.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.57%	12.05%	+6.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.80%	13.22%	+8.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.02%	13.91%	+7.11%

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEAD.TO has a 0.92% expense ratio, which is lower than ONEQ.TO's 0.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEAD.TO vs. ONEQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

LEAD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.67%, more than ONEQ.TO's 1.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
LEAD.TO Evolve Future Leadership Fund	11.67%	9.21%	5.84%	7.25%	9.02%	5.44%	1.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ONEQ.TO CI Global Core Plus Equity ETF	1.58%	1.60%	1.05%	1.53%	1.38%	0.89%	1.22%	1.39%	0.94%	1.03%	1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LEAD.TO and ONEQ.TO in my portfolio?

LEAD.TO and ONEQ.TO have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LEAD.TO or ONEQ.TO?

On fees, LEAD.TO is cheaper at 0.92% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LEAD.TO or ONEQ.TO?

LEAD.TO is cheaper with a 0.92% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for ONEQ.TO.

What is the main difference between LEAD.TO and ONEQ.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Evolve Funds Group Inc. and CI Global Asset Management. Their fees differ too: 0.92% for LEAD.TO and 0.97% for ONEQ.TO.