MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

MEQT.TO (Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF) and QTIP.NEO (Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - MEQT.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Mackenzie, while QTIP.NEO is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Solactive US Treasury Inflation-Linked Bond Hedged to CAD TR Index. MEQT.TO is actively managed, while QTIP.NEO is passively managed. Over the past year, MEQT.TO returned 25.74% vs -0.01% for QTIP.NEO. Their 0.13 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. MEQT.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for QTIP.NEO.

Performance

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF (MEQT.TO) and Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEQT.TO achieves a 12.84% return, which is significantly higher than QTIP.NEO's -0.36% return.

MEQT.TO

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: -1.97%
• 6M: 10.00%
• YTD: 12.84%
• 1Y: 25.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 23.44%

QTIP.NEO

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -0.62%
• 6M: -0.57%
• YTD: -0.36%
• 1Y: -0.01%
• 3Y*: 2.35%
• 5Y*: -0.77%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 1.87%

*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)
MEQT.TO Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF	CA$180.94K	CA$187.75K	CA$184.59K
QTIP.NEO Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	CA$168.54K	CA$356.78K	CA$414.05K

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MEQT.TO Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF	12.84%	21.31%	25.87%	2.36%
QTIP.NEO Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	-0.36%	4.82%	0.82%	3.30%

Correlation

The correlation between MEQT.TO and QTIP.NEO is 0.20, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023	0.13

Return for Risk

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MEQT.TO

MEQT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 85
MEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
MEQT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
MEQT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 86
MEQT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
MEQT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 86

QTIP.NEO

QTIP.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 13
QTIP.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
QTIP.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
QTIP.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 12
QTIP.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
QTIP.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 14

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF (MEQT.TO) and Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.NEO). 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.

	MEQT.TO	QTIP.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	0.16	+1.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.00	0.25	+2.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.03	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.34	0.29	+3.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.47	0.61	+12.86

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is higher than the QTIP.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 0.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEQT.TO and QTIP.NEO, 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

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEQT.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.14%, roughly equal to the maximum QTIP.NEO drawdown of -15.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEQT.TO and QTIP.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEQT.TO	QTIP.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.14%	-15.31%	+0.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.68%	-2.02%	-5.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-4.22%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-15.31%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.25%	-5.56%	+3.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.30%	-4.89%	+3.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.90%	0.96%	+0.94%

Volatility

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Volatility Comparison

Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF (MEQT.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.77% compared to Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.NEO) at 0.68%. This indicates that MEQT.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QTIP.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MEQT.TO	QTIP.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.77%	0.68%	+3.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.21%	2.58%	+7.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.14%	3.60%	+8.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.05%	6.21%	+5.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.05%	6.27%	+5.78%

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEQT.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is higher than QTIP.NEO's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

MEQT.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Dividend Comparison

MEQT.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than QTIP.NEO's 3.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MEQT.TO Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF	1.47%	1.60%	1.73%	0.81%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QTIP.NEO Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	3.70%	4.54%	4.53%	4.76%	9.47%	5.24%	1.55%	2.29%	2.91%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEQT.TO and QTIP.NEO in my portfolio?

MEQT.TO and QTIP.NEO have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MEQT.TO or QTIP.NEO?

On fees, QTIP.NEO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MEQT.TO or QTIP.NEO?

QTIP.NEO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.17% for MEQT.TO.

What is the main difference between MEQT.TO and QTIP.NEO?

MEQT.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while QTIP.NEO is Inflation-Protected Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for MEQT.TO and 0.15% for QTIP.NEO.