PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

PRA.TO (Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund) and CSBG.NEO (CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PRA.TO returned 15.86%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for CSBG.NEO. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PRA.TO charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for CSBG.NEO.

Performance

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund (PRA.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PRA.TO achieves a 26.15% return, which is significantly higher than CSBG.NEO's 0.49% return.

PRA.TO

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 5.87%
• 6M: 15.04%
• YTD: 26.15%
• 1Y: 38.59%
• 3Y*: 17.58%
• 5Y*: 15.86%
• 10Y*: 10.51%
• ALL TIME*: 7.94%

CSBG.NEO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.49%
• 6M: 0.49%
• YTD: 0.49%
• 1Y: 0.49%
• 3Y*: 0.96%
• 5Y*: 0.96%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 1.15%

*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)
CSBG.NEO CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF	CA$0.00	CA$0.00	CA$0.00
PRA.TO Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund	CA$227.74K	CA$395.74K	CA$474.14K

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PRA.TO Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund	26.15%	18.21%	8.78%	2.07%	15.88%	8.62%
CSBG.NEO CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF	0.49%	0.00%	1.17%	1.22%	0.27%	2.60%

Correlation

The correlation between PRA.TO and CSBG.NEO is 0.00, 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	0.00
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.01
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 19, 2021	0.01

Return for Risk

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PRA.TO

PRA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 95
PRA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
PRA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
PRA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 95
PRA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PRA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

CSBG.NEO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund (PRA.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.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.

	PRA.TO	CSBG.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.08	1.01	+2.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.13	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.32	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.55	—	—

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PRA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.08, which is higher than the CSBG.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PRA.TO and CSBG.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

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRA.TO drawdown since its inception was -34.17%, which is greater than CSBG.NEO's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRA.TO and CSBG.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PRA.TO	CSBG.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.17%	0.00%	-34.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.13%	0.00%	-6.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.47%	0.00%	-13.47%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.37%	0.00%	-19.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.26%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	0.00%	-0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.57%	0.00%	-7.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.88%	0.00%	+1.88%

Volatility

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Volatility Comparison

Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund (PRA.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.76% compared to CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO) at 0.49%. This indicates that PRA.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSBG.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PRA.TO	CSBG.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.76%	0.49%	+2.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.46%	0.49%	+8.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.60%	0.49%	+12.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.59%	1.03%	+12.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.45%	1.11%	+13.34%

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PRA.TO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is lower than CSBG.NEO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

PRA.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Dividend Comparison

PRA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.07%, more than CSBG.NEO's 0.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSBG.NEO CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF	0.48%	0.00%	1.16%	1.21%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PRA.TO Purpose Diversified Real Asset Fund	2.07%	3.23%	2.95%	3.12%	1.93%	1.25%	1.52%	1.57%	1.77%	1.93%	1.64%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PRA.TO and CSBG.NEO in my portfolio?

PRA.TO and CSBG.NEO have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PRA.TO or CSBG.NEO?

On fees, PRA.TO is cheaper at 0.73% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PRA.TO or CSBG.NEO?

PRA.TO is cheaper with a 0.73% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

What is the main difference between PRA.TO and CSBG.NEO?

They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments Inc. and CIBC. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for PRA.TO and 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.