PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
QTIP.NEO vs. MIVG.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

QTIP.NEO vs. MIVG.TO

Last updated Jul 18, 2026
Documentation

QTIP.NEO (Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and MIVG.TO (Mackenzie Ivy Global Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QTIP.NEO is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Solactive US Treasury Inflation-Linked Bond Hedged to CAD TR Index, while MIVG.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Mackenzie. QTIP.NEO is passively managed, while MIVG.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, QTIP.NEO returned -0.36%/yr vs 8.51%/yr for MIVG.TO. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

QTIP.NEO vs. MIVG.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTIP.NEO achieves a 0.35% return, which is significantly lower than MIVG.TO's 2.83% return.

QTIP.NEO

1D
0.16%
1M
0.15%
6M
0.18%
YTD
0.35%
1Y
1.43%
3Y*
2.36%
5Y*
-0.36%
10Y*
—

MIVG.TO

1D
-0.59%
1M
2.15%
6M
0.55%
YTD
2.83%
1Y
8.58%
3Y*
13.07%
5Y*
8.51%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
QTIP.NEO
Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.35%4.82%0.82%3.16%-12.98%6.05%9.48%7.49%-0.75%
MIVG.TO
Mackenzie Ivy Global Equity ETF		2.83%9.98%23.80%11.57%-8.98%12.79%11.20%17.97%0.26%

Correlation

The correlation between QTIP.NEO and MIVG.TO is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.08

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2018

0.02

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Mackenzie Ivy Global Equity ETF

Often compared with QTIP.NEO:
QTIP.NEO vs. ZTIP.TOQTIP.NEO vs. QDXH.TOQTIP.NEO vs. QDX.TOQTIP.NEO vs. WSHR.NEOQTIP.NEO vs. MGRW.TOQTIP.NEO vs. XSTH.TOQTIP.NEO vs. ZRR.TO
Often compared with MIVG.TO:
MIVG.TO vs. CIE.NEOMIVG.TO vs. CYH.TOMIVG.TO vs. FGEP.TOMIVG.TO vs. FINN.NEOMIVG.TO vs. HEQT.TOMIVG.TO vs. MAAA.TOMIVG.TO vs. MEQT.TO

Return for Risk

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
QTIP.NEO
QTIP.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
QTIP.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank
MIVG.TO
MIVG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
MIVG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MIVG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
MIVG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
MIVG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
MIVG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.NEO) and Mackenzie Ivy Global Equity ETF (MIVG.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.

QTIP.NEOMIVG.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.39
0.72

-0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.57
1.12

-0.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.13

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.71

0.81

-0.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.61

2.31

-0.70

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

The current QTIP.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 0.39, which is lower than the MIVG.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTIP.NEO and MIVG.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

QTIP.NEO vs. MIVG.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTIP.NEO drawdown since its inception was -15.31%, smaller than the maximum MIVG.TO drawdown of -22.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTIP.NEO and MIVG.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QTIP.NEOMIVG.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.31%

-22.69%

+7.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.02%

-10.67%

+8.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.79%

-12.16%

+7.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.31%

-18.88%

+3.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.89%

-2.23%

-2.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.89%

-3.55%

-1.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.89%

3.72%

-2.83%

Volatility

QTIP.NEO vs. MIVG.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.NEO) is 1.01%, while Mackenzie Ivy Global Equity ETF (MIVG.TO) has a volatility of 4.99%. This indicates that QTIP.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MIVG.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QTIP.NEOMIVG.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.01%

4.99%

-3.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.71%

9.69%

-6.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.67%

11.94%

-8.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.22%

12.41%

-6.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.28%

13.43%

-7.15%

Dividends

QTIP.NEO vs. MIVG.TO - Dividend Comparison

QTIP.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.02%, more than MIVG.TO's 0.64% yield.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
MIVG.TO
Mackenzie Ivy Global Equity ETF		0.64%0.66%0.54%1.17%1.11%0.59%0.86%1.18%0.91%0.04%
QTIP.NEO
Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		4.02%4.54%4.53%4.76%9.47%5.24%1.55%2.29%2.91%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

QTIP.NEO and MIVG.TO have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QTIP.NEO is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while MIVG.TO is Global Equities.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QTIP.NEO and MIVG.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