RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RUD.TO (RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)) and CNCL.TO (Global X Enhanced S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. RUD.TO is actively managed, while CNCL.TO is passively managed. Over the past year, RUD.TO returned 22.08% vs 29.00% for CNCL.TO. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RUD.TO charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CNCL.TO.

Performance

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) and Global X Enhanced S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF (CNCL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUD.TO achieves a 8.99% return, which is significantly lower than CNCL.TO's 9.70% return.

RUD.TO

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 5.71%
• YTD: 8.99%
• 6M: 6.16%
• 1Y: 22.08%
• 3Y*: 17.06%
• 5Y*: 13.78%
• 10Y*: 13.02%

CNCL.TO

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: 3.65%
• YTD: 9.70%
• 6M: 11.65%
• 1Y: 29.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RUD.TO RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)	8.99%	7.31%	22.78%	8.94%
CNCL.TO Global X Enhanced S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF	9.70%	22.73%	17.93%	4.66%

Correlation

The correlation between RUD.TO and CNCL.TO is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 7, 2023	0.49

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RUD.TO	CNCL.TO
Technology	31.1%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	13.2%	4.1%
Financial Services	12.9%	37.1%
Industrials	8.7%	8.1%
Communication Services	8.4%	2.2%
Consumer Defensive	8.4%	3.5%
Healthcare	8.0%	-
Energy	5.0%	17.2%
Utilities	3.0%	2.7%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.2%
Basic Materials	0.5%	16.5%

Return for Risk

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RUD.TO

RUD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 58
RUD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
RUD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
RUD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 54
RUD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
RUD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 65

CNCL.TO

CNCL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 79
CNCL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
CNCL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
CNCL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
CNCL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
CNCL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) and Global X Enhanced S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF (CNCL.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.

	RUD.TO	CNCL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.81	2.48	-0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	3.39	-0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.49	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.34	3.66	-0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.90	17.95	-6.06
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the CNCL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUD.TO and CNCL.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

	RUD.TO	CNCL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.81	2.48	-0.67
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.81	1.53	-0.72

Drawdowns

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RUD.TO drawdown since its inception was -29.89%, which is greater than CNCL.TO's maximum drawdown of -13.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUD.TO and CNCL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RUD.TO	CNCL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.89%	-13.75%	-16.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.65%	-7.97%	+1.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-29.89%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-0.25%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.99%	-1.53%	-2.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.86%	1.62%	+0.24%

Volatility

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) is 2.59%, while Global X Enhanced S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF (CNCL.TO) has a volatility of 2.92%. This indicates that RUD.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNCL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RUD.TO	CNCL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.59%	2.92%	-0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.27%	9.97%	-0.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.31%	11.77%	+0.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.38%	12.51%	+2.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.53%	12.51%	+3.02%

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RUD.TO has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than CNCL.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

RUD.TO vs. CNCL.TO - Dividend Comparison

RUD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, less than CNCL.TO's 8.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNCL.TO Global X Enhanced S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF	8.49%	9.15%	11.88%	6.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RUD.TO RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)	1.37%	1.35%	1.16%	1.49%	1.57%	1.10%	1.64%	1.93%	2.01%	1.78%	1.73%	2.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RUD.TO and CNCL.TO in my portfolio?

RUD.TO and CNCL.TO have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RUD.TO or CNCL.TO?

On fees, RUD.TO is cheaper at 0.43% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RUD.TO or CNCL.TO?

RUD.TO is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CNCL.TO.

What is the main difference between RUD.TO and CNCL.TO?

They also come from different issuers: RBC and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for RUD.TO and 0.65% for CNCL.TO.