PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
QDX.TO vs. XML.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

QDX.TO (Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF) and XML.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - QDX.TO tracks the Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD Index while XML.TO tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QDX.TO returned 11.47%/yr vs 9.98%/yr for XML.TO. Their 0.33 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QDX.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for XML.TO.

Performance

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.TO) and iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDX.TO achieves a 14.10% return, which is significantly higher than XML.TO's 11.20% return.

QDX.TO

1D
-0.49%
1M
-1.06%
6M
8.38%
YTD
14.10%
1Y
26.93%
3Y*
18.42%
5Y*
11.47%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
8.89%

XML.TO

1D
-0.35%
1M
4.79%
6M
8.74%
YTD
11.20%
1Y
18.46%
3Y*
14.92%
5Y*
9.98%
10Y*
7.84%
ALL TIME*
7.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

QDX.TO

Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF
CA$357.51KCA$296.06KCA$600.37K

XML.TO

iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)
CA$8.48KCA$7.87KCA$8.75K

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
QDX.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF		14.10%25.29%12.93%13.65%-8.61%11.24%5.06%15.27%-8.78%
XML.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		11.20%17.56%14.13%11.69%-6.94%13.27%-5.87%16.26%-4.05%

Correlation

The correlation between QDX.TO and XML.TO is 0.30, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.30

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.33

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2018

0.33

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
QDX.TO
XML.TO

Financial Services

24.6%
19.7%

Industrials

19.0%
15.7%

Technology

12.4%
4.4%

Healthcare

10.4%
12.2%

Consumer Cyclical

7.7%
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

6.7%
12.6%

Basic Materials

5.8%
1.6%

Communication Services

4.3%
9.1%

Utilities

3.7%
9.0%

Energy

3.4%
7.7%

Real Estate

2.0%
2.9%

Financial Services

QDX.TO
24.6%
XML.TO
19.7%

Industrials

QDX.TO
19.0%
XML.TO
15.7%

Technology

QDX.TO
12.4%
XML.TO
4.4%

Healthcare

QDX.TO
10.4%
XML.TO
12.2%

Consumer Cyclical

QDX.TO
7.7%
XML.TO
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

QDX.TO
6.7%
XML.TO
12.6%

Basic Materials

QDX.TO
5.8%
XML.TO
1.6%

Communication Services

QDX.TO
4.3%
XML.TO
9.1%

Utilities

QDX.TO
3.7%
XML.TO
9.0%

Energy

QDX.TO
3.4%
XML.TO
7.7%

Real Estate

QDX.TO
2.0%
XML.TO
2.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF

iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with QDX.TO:
QDX.TO vs. QDXH.TOQDX.TO vs. FCRI.TOQDX.TO vs. TILV.TOQDX.TO vs. QTIP.NEOQDX.TO vs. RIDH.TOQDX.TO vs. XMV.TOQDX.TO vs. ZXM.TO
Often compared with XML.TO:
XML.TO vs. XIN.TOXML.TO vs. XSP.TOXML.TO vs. XMI.TOXML.TO vs. XEQT.TOXML.TO vs. HXQ.TOXML.TO vs. XMU.TOXML.TO vs. XMW.TO

Return for Risk

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
QDX.TO
QDX.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
QDX.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
XML.TO
XML.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
XML.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XML.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
XML.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
XML.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
XML.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.TO) and iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.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.

QDX.TOXML.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.77
1.93

-0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.54
2.74

-0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.41

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.42

2.79

-0.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.28

8.69

+0.58

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDX.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is comparable to the XML.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDX.TO and XML.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

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDX.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.08%, roughly equal to the maximum XML.TO drawdown of -28.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDX.TO and XML.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QDX.TOXML.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.08%

-28.62%

+0.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.88%

-6.46%

-4.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.25%

-7.46%

-6.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.55%

-12.34%

-11.21%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-28.62%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.38%

-0.35%

-1.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.48%

-3.42%

-1.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.83%

2.07%

+0.76%

Volatility

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Volatility Comparison

Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.13% compared to iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) at 2.05%. This indicates that QDX.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XML.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QDX.TOXML.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.13%

2.05%

+2.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.78%

7.83%

+4.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.89%

9.32%

+5.57%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.11%

9.82%

+4.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.45%

11.93%

+3.52%

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDX.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than XML.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDX.TO vs. XML.TO - Dividend Comparison

QDX.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, less than XML.TO's 2.61% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
QDX.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF		2.34%2.51%2.48%2.61%2.73%2.25%1.91%2.76%3.03%0.00%0.00%
XML.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.61%2.76%2.67%2.56%2.02%1.92%1.11%3.62%2.79%1.91%3.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

QDX.TO and XML.TO have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QDX.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QDX.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for XML.TO.

QDX.TO tracks Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD Index, while XML.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index. They also come from different issuers: Mackenzie and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for QDX.TO and 0.40% for XML.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QDX.TO and XML.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