SLF vs. RSI.TO
SLF (Sun Life Financial Inc.) and RSI.TO (Rogers Sugar Inc.) are both stocks. SLF operates in Insurance - Diversified (Financial Services), while RSI.TO operates in Confectioners (Consumer Defensive). Over the past 10 years, SLF returned 13.18%/yr vs 7.41%/yr for RSI.TO. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
SLF is traded in USD, while RSI.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the RSI.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SLF achieves a 25.30% return, which is significantly higher than RSI.TO's 15.60% return. Over the past 10 years, SLF has outperformed RSI.TO with an annualized return of 13.18%, while RSI.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 7.41% annualized return.
SLF
- 1D
- 1.05%
- 1M
- 9.27%
- YTD
- 25.30%
- 6M
- 29.43%
- 1Y
- 22.99%
- 3Y*
- 19.96%
- 5Y*
- 12.61%
- 10Y*
- 13.18%
RSI.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 2.05%
- YTD
- 15.60%
- 6M
- 16.67%
- 1Y
- 27.79%
- 3Y*
- 11.22%
- 5Y*
- 6.82%
- 10Y*
- 7.41%
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SLF Sun Life Financial Inc. | 25.30% | 9.72% | 19.48% | 17.77% | -12.89% | 29.71% | 1.55% | 42.69% | -16.37% | 11.18% |
RSI.TO Rogers Sugar Inc. | 15.60% | 12.97% | 7.15% | 3.16% | -4.55% | 12.95% | 25.73% | 0.64% | -15.38% | 5.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between SLF and RSI.TO is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2006 | 0.23 |
The correlation between SLF and RSI.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (1 year) to 0.28 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
SLF:
$30.85B
RSI.TO:
CA$1.04B
SLF:
CA$6.22
RSI.TO:
CA$0.47
SLF:
17.21
RSI.TO:
14.64
SLF:
1.43
RSI.TO:
0.82
SLF:
1.89
RSI.TO:
2.19
SLF:
CA$39.40B
RSI.TO:
CA$1.24B
SLF:
CA$20.48B
RSI.TO:
CA$199.73M
SLF:
CA$4.74B
RSI.TO:
CA$150.40M
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
SLF vs. RSI.TO — Risk / Return Rank
SLF
RSI.TO
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sun Life Financial Inc. (SLF) and Rogers Sugar Inc. (RSI.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.
| SLF | RSI.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.35 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 3.23 | -1.68 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.34 | 9.77 | -6.42 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SLF drawdown since its inception was -78.60%, which is greater than RSI.TO's maximum drawdown of -56.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SLF and RSI.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SLF | RSI.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.60% | -56.20% | -22.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.91% | -8.65% | -6.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.91% | -17.06% | +2.15% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.77% | -22.07% | -8.70% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -50.84% | -42.58% | -8.26% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.86% | -12.73% | -4.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.90% | 2.85% | +4.05% |
Volatility
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Volatility Comparison
Sun Life Financial Inc. (SLF) has a higher volatility of 4.82% compared to Rogers Sugar Inc. (RSI.TO) at 3.10%. This indicates that SLF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSI.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SLF | RSI.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.82% | 3.10% | +1.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.14% | 9.76% | +4.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.20% | 15.05% | +5.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.44% | 17.36% | +2.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.88% | 20.03% | +2.85% |
Dividends
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Dividend Comparison
SLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, less than RSI.TO's 5.19% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RSI.TO Rogers Sugar Inc. | 5.19% | 6.05% | 6.13% | 6.69% | 6.33% | 6.05% | 6.42% | 7.32% | 6.62% | 5.70% | 5.29% | 8.49% |
SLF Sun Life Financial Inc. | 3.47% | 4.03% | 4.00% | 4.98% | 4.59% | 3.32% | 3.69% | 3.47% | 4.71% | 3.17% | 3.98% | 4.64% |
Financials
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Sun Life Financial Inc. and Rogers Sugar Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
SLF vs. RSI.TO - Profitability Comparison
SLF - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Sun Life Financial Inc. reported a gross profit of 8.88B and revenue of 8.88B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 100.0%.
RSI.TO - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Rogers Sugar Inc. reported a gross profit of 48.72M and revenue of 280.62M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 17.4%.
SLF - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Sun Life Financial Inc. reported an operating income of 633.63M and revenue of 8.88B, resulting in an operating margin of 7.1%.
RSI.TO - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Rogers Sugar Inc. reported an operating income of 27.98M and revenue of 280.62M, resulting in an operating margin of 10.0%.
SLF - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Sun Life Financial Inc. reported a net income of 537.39M and revenue of 8.88B, resulting in a net margin of 6.1%.
RSI.TO - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Rogers Sugar Inc. reported a net income of 12.65M and revenue of 280.62M, resulting in a net margin of 4.5%.
Frequently Asked Questions
SLF and RSI.TO have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Find the right allocation for SLF and RSI.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