TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO
TEQT.TO (TD All-Equity ETF Portfolio) and CMGG.TO (CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund) are both Global Equities funds. TEQT.TO is passively managed, while CMGG.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, TEQT.TO returned 29.82% vs 38.88% for CMGG.TO. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TEQT.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for CMGG.TO.
Performance
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TEQT.TO achieves a 11.59% return, which is significantly lower than CMGG.TO's 21.24% return.
TEQT.TO
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- 5.99%
- YTD
- 11.59%
- 6M
- 11.36%
- 1Y
- 29.82%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CMGG.TO
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 10.96%
- YTD
- 21.24%
- 6M
- 21.36%
- 1Y
- 38.88%
- 3Y*
- 35.34%
- 5Y*
- 20.56%
- 10Y*
- —
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TEQT.TO TD All-Equity ETF Portfolio | 11.59% | 27.04% |
CMGG.TO CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund | 21.24% | 32.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between TEQT.TO and CMGG.TO is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2025 | 0.80 |
The correlation between TEQT.TO and CMGG.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO — Risk / Return Rank
TEQT.TO
CMGG.TO
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TD All-Equity ETF Portfolio (TEQT.TO) and CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.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.
| TEQT.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.40 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.93 | 3.85 | +0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.17 | 10.77 | +5.40 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| TEQT.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.70 | 2.36 | +0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.99 | 0.98 | +2.01 |
Drawdowns
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TEQT.TO drawdown since its inception was -7.62%, smaller than the maximum CMGG.TO drawdown of -29.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TEQT.TO and CMGG.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TEQT.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.62% | -29.00% | +21.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.62% | -10.15% | +2.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -22.85% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.00% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.45% | 0.00% | -0.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.00% | -8.91% | +7.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.85% | 3.62% | -1.77% |
Volatility
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for TD All-Equity ETF Portfolio (TEQT.TO) is 3.03%, while CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.TO) has a volatility of 6.68%. This indicates that TEQT.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMGG.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TEQT.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.03% | 6.68% | -3.65% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.80% | 12.94% | -4.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.10% | 16.53% | -5.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.18% | 18.22% | -6.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.18% | 18.49% | -6.31% |
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
TEQT.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than CMGG.TO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
TEQT.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Dividend Comparison
TEQT.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, while CMGG.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CMGG.TO CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TEQT.TO TD All-Equity ETF Portfolio | 1.31% | 1.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TEQT.TO and CMGG.TO have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, TEQT.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TEQT.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CMGG.TO.
They also come from different issuers: TD and CI Global Asset Management. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for TEQT.TO and 0.90% for CMGG.TO.
Find the right allocation for TEQT.TO and CMGG.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