PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO

Last updated Jul 16, 2026
Documentation

RLB.TO (RBC 1-5 Year Laddered Canadian Bond ETF) and CDLB.TO (CI DoubleLine Total Return Bond US$ Fund ETF C$ Hedged Series) are both exchange-traded funds - RLB.TO is a Total Bond Market fund actively managed by RBC, while CDLB.TO is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by CI Global Asset Management. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RLB.TO returned 2.10%/yr vs -0.57%/yr for CDLB.TO. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in RBC 1-5 Year Laddered Canadian Bond ETF (RLB.TO) and CI DoubleLine Total Return Bond US$ Fund ETF C$ Hedged Series (CDLB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RLB.TO achieves a 1.23% return, which is significantly higher than CDLB.TO's -0.42% return.

RLB.TO

1D
0.11%
1M
-0.05%
6M
0.96%
YTD
1.23%
1Y
3.35%
3Y*
5.06%
5Y*
2.10%
10Y*
2.15%

CDLB.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.43%
6M
-0.42%
YTD
-0.42%
1Y
2.92%
3Y*
3.31%
5Y*
-0.57%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
RLB.TO
RBC 1-5 Year Laddered Canadian Bond ETF		1.23%3.97%5.39%5.93%-5.15%-0.78%2.92%
CDLB.TO
CI DoubleLine Total Return Bond US$ Fund ETF C$ Hedged Series		-0.42%5.44%2.91%2.39%-12.02%-0.11%3.68%

Correlation

The correlation between RLB.TO and CDLB.TO is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.28

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

0.22

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

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2020

0.13

The correlation between RLB.TO and CDLB.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (all time) to 0.28 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

RBC 1-5 Year Laddered Canadian Bond ETF

CI DoubleLine Total Return Bond US$ Fund ETF C$ Hedged Series

Often compared with CDLB.TO:
CDLB.TO vs. WXM.TOCDLB.TO vs. CGHY.TOCDLB.TO vs. CCCX-B.TOCDLB.TO vs. ZXM.TOCDLB.TO vs. CCCX.TOCDLB.TO vs. ETHX.TOCDLB.TO vs. FLI.TO

Return for Risk

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RLB.TO
RLB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
RLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
RLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
RLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
RLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
CDLB.TO
CDLB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
CDLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CDLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
CDLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
CDLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
CDLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
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.

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RBC 1-5 Year Laddered Canadian Bond ETF (RLB.TO) and CI DoubleLine Total Return Bond US$ Fund ETF C$ Hedged Series (CDLB.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.

RLB.TOCDLB.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.44
0.77

+0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.09
1.15

+0.94

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.26

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.28

1.39

+0.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.18

2.87

+4.31

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RLB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is higher than the CDLB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RLB.TO and CDLB.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

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RLB.TO drawdown since its inception was -13.93%, smaller than the maximum CDLB.TO drawdown of -16.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RLB.TO and CDLB.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RLB.TOCDLB.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.93%

-16.85%

+2.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.48%

-2.11%

+0.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.48%

-5.32%

+3.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-7.68%

-16.85%

+9.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-13.93%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.16%

-3.30%

+3.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.52%

-6.34%

+4.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.47%

1.02%

-0.55%

Volatility

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for RBC 1-5 Year Laddered Canadian Bond ETF (RLB.TO) is 0.53%, while CI DoubleLine Total Return Bond US$ Fund ETF C$ Hedged Series (CDLB.TO) has a volatility of 0.69%. This indicates that RLB.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CDLB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RLB.TOCDLB.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.53%

0.69%

-0.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.97%

2.45%

-0.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.34%

3.83%

-1.49%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.01%

5.36%

-2.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.40%

4.91%

-0.51%

Dividends

RLB.TO vs. CDLB.TO - Dividend Comparison

RLB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, less than CDLB.TO's 4.54% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CDLB.TO
CI DoubleLine Total Return Bond US$ Fund ETF C$ Hedged Series		4.54%4.45%4.65%3.87%2.81%2.38%1.14%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RLB.TO
RBC 1-5 Year Laddered Canadian Bond ETF		3.47%3.25%2.99%2.65%2.54%2.27%2.44%2.66%2.81%2.95%2.32%

Frequently Asked Questions

RLB.TO and CDLB.TO have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RLB.TO is categorized as Total Bond Market, while CDLB.TO is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. They also come from different issuers: RBC and CI Global Asset Management.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RLB.TO and CDLB.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