QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQC-F.TO (Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged) and CBIL.TO (Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQC-F.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while CBIL.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund actively managed by Global X. QQC-F.TO is passively managed, while CBIL.TO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, QQC-F.TO returned 26.56%/yr vs 3.63%/yr for CBIL.TO. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QQC-F.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for CBIL.TO.

Performance

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged (QQC-F.TO) and Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQC-F.TO achieves a 19.79% return, which is significantly higher than CBIL.TO's 0.85% return.

QQC-F.TO

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 10.71%
• YTD: 19.79%
• 6M: 17.83%
• 1Y: 38.43%
• 3Y*: 26.56%
• 5Y*: 16.33%
• 10Y*: 20.30%

CBIL.TO

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.20%
• YTD: 0.85%
• 6M: 1.08%
• 1Y: 2.34%
• 3Y*: 3.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
QQC-F.TO Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged	19.79%	18.41%	24.19%	27.98%
CBIL.TO Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF	0.85%	2.68%	4.47%	3.36%

Correlation

The correlation between QQC-F.TO and CBIL.TO is 0.05, 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	0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2023	0.02

Return for Risk

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQC-F.TO

QQC-F.TO Risk / Return Rank: 66
QQC-F.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QQC-F.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
QQC-F.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 68
QQC-F.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
QQC-F.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 60

CBIL.TO

CBIL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 99
CBIL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
CBIL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
CBIL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CBIL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CBIL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged (QQC-F.TO) and Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.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.

	QQC-F.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.43	9.47	-7.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.23	23.59	-20.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	5.38	-3.97
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	58.74	-55.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.91	339.60	-328.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQC-F.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is lower than the CBIL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 9.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQC-F.TO and CBIL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QQC-F.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.43	9.47	-7.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.91	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	11.64	-10.71

Drawdowns

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQC-F.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.03%, which is greater than CBIL.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQC-F.TO and CBIL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQC-F.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.03%	-0.06%	-35.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.16%	-0.04%	-13.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.76%	-0.06%	-22.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.22%	0.00%	-0.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.50%	-0.00%	-5.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.53%	0.01%	+3.52%

Volatility

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Volatility Comparison

Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged (QQC-F.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.49% compared to Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.TO) at 0.08%. This indicates that QQC-F.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBIL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QQC-F.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.49%	0.08%	+4.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.08%	0.19%	+11.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.89%	0.25%	+15.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.45%	0.31%	+22.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.54%	0.31%	+22.23%

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQC-F.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than CBIL.TO's 0.10% 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

QQC-F.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Dividend Comparison

QQC-F.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBIL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.29%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CBIL.TO Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF	2.29%	2.59%	4.38%	3.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQC-F.TO Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged	0.00%	0.09%	0.50%	0.57%	0.89%	0.66%	0.49%	0.64%	0.77%	0.66%	0.81%	0.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQC-F.TO and CBIL.TO in my portfolio?

QQC-F.TO and CBIL.TO have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QQC-F.TO or CBIL.TO?

On fees, CBIL.TO is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQC-F.TO or CBIL.TO?

CBIL.TO is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for QQC-F.TO.

What is the main difference between QQC-F.TO and CBIL.TO?

QQC-F.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while CBIL.TO is Canadian Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for QQC-F.TO and 0.10% for CBIL.TO.