MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO
MNS.TO (Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves) and XIN.TO (iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - MNS.TO is a Silver fund tracking the N/A (Physical Bullion), while XIN.TO is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE 100% Hedged to CAD Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MNS.TO returned 19.99%/yr vs 11.24%/yr for XIN.TO. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MNS.TO charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for XIN.TO.
Performance
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MNS.TO achieves a -23.86% return, which is significantly lower than XIN.TO's 10.80% return.
MNS.TO
- 1D
- -5.73%
- 1M
- -20.12%
- YTD
- -23.86%
- 6M
- -23.85%
- 1Y
- 62.59%
- 3Y*
- 42.48%
- 5Y*
- 19.99%
- 10Y*
- —
XIN.TO
- 1D
- -1.63%
- 1M
- 1.93%
- YTD
- 10.80%
- 6M
- 10.84%
- 1Y
- 24.95%
- 3Y*
- 15.99%
- 5Y*
- 11.24%
- 10Y*
- 11.13%
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MNS.TO Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves | -23.86% | 161.12% | 41.73% | -5.85% | 5.27% | -15.46% | 45.70% | 9.85% | -1.65% | -1.63% |
XIN.TO iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 10.80% | 20.30% | 10.20% | 18.55% | -6.09% | 18.49% | -0.36% | 22.63% | -10.94% | 15.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between MNS.TO and XIN.TO is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2016 | 0.07 |
Over the past year, MNS.TO and XIN.TO have become more correlated (0.29) than their long-term average of 0.07, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO — Risk / Return Rank
MNS.TO
XIN.TO
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves (MNS.TO) and iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XIN.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.
| MNS.TO | XIN.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.35 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.45 | 2.58 | -1.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.25 | 10.59 | -7.35 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MNS.TO drawdown since its inception was -43.46%, smaller than the maximum XIN.TO drawdown of -58.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNS.TO and XIN.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MNS.TO | XIN.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.46% | -58.55% | +15.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -43.46% | -9.72% | -33.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -43.46% | -14.23% | -29.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -43.46% | -15.60% | -27.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.67% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -43.46% | -1.63% | -41.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.73% | -13.85% | -3.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 19.34% | 2.36% | +16.98% |
Volatility
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO - Volatility Comparison
Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves (MNS.TO) has a higher volatility of 12.07% compared to iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XIN.TO) at 4.41%. This indicates that MNS.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XIN.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MNS.TO | XIN.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.07% | 4.41% | +7.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 52.64% | 11.33% | +41.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 55.40% | 13.35% | +42.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.39% | 14.06% | +20.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.15% | 15.96% | +15.19% |
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
MNS.TO has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than XIN.TO's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
MNS.TO vs. XIN.TO - Dividend Comparison
MNS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XIN.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MNS.TO Royal Canadian Mint - Canadian Silver Reserves | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XIN.TO iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 2.62% | 2.90% | 2.69% | 2.51% | 2.18% | 2.65% | 1.81% | 2.58% | 2.87% | 2.15% | 2.39% | 2.33% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MNS.TO and XIN.TO have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MNS.TO is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MNS.TO is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for XIN.TO.
MNS.TO is categorized as Silver, while XIN.TO is Global Equities. MNS.TO tracks N/A (Physical Bullion), while XIN.TO tracks MSCI EAFE 100% Hedged to CAD Index. They also come from different issuers: Royal Canadian Mint and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for MNS.TO and 0.52% for XIN.TO.
Find the right allocation for MNS.TO and XIN.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