PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XBAL.TO (iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio) and CEQT.TO (CI Equity Asset Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XBAL.TO returned 14.21%/yr vs 22.17%/yr for CEQT.TO. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XBAL.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for CEQT.TO.

Performance

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio (XBAL.TO) and CI Equity Asset Allocation ETF (CEQT.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBAL.TO achieves a 7.81% return, which is significantly lower than CEQT.TO's 13.14% return.

XBAL.TO

1D
-0.36%
1M
4.13%
YTD
7.81%
6M
6.00%
1Y
17.48%
3Y*
14.21%
5Y*
8.15%
10Y*
7.69%

CEQT.TO

1D
0.75%
1M
6.45%
YTD
13.14%
6M
13.90%
1Y
32.12%
3Y*
22.17%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
XBAL.TO
iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio		7.81%11.87%15.76%7.11%
CEQT.TO
CI Equity Asset Allocation ETF		13.14%18.84%27.38%6.47%

Correlation

The correlation between XBAL.TO and CEQT.TO is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.40

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

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2023

0.29

The correlation between XBAL.TO and CEQT.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (3 years) to 0.40 (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.

iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio

CI Equity Asset Allocation ETF

Often compared with XBAL.TO:
XBAL.TO vs. XEQT.TOXBAL.TO vs. VBAL.TOXBAL.TO vs. XCNS.TOXBAL.TO vs. XEI.TOXBAL.TO vs. ZBAL.TOXBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TOXBAL.TO vs. GBAL.TO
Often compared with CEQT.TO:
CEQT.TO vs. ZEQT.TOCEQT.TO vs. VXM-B.TOCEQT.TO vs. PYF.TOCEQT.TO vs. CSBG.NEOCEQT.TO vs. CCOM.TOCEQT.TO vs. TEQT.TOCEQT.TO vs. MIX.TO

Return for Risk

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XBAL.TO
XBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
XBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
XBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
CEQT.TO
CEQT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
CEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEQT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEQT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
CEQT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEQT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio (XBAL.TO) and CI Equity Asset Allocation ETF (CEQT.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.

XBAL.TOCEQT.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.06
3.05

-0.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.87
4.90

-2.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

2.03

-0.65

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.89

4.44

-1.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.15

17.96

-5.80

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is lower than the CEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBAL.TO and CEQT.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XBAL.TOCEQT.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.06

3.05

-0.99

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.93

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.68

1.67

-0.99

Drawdowns

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBAL.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.83%, which is greater than CEQT.TO's maximum drawdown of -14.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBAL.TO and CEQT.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XBAL.TOCEQT.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.83%

-14.02%

-14.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.06%

-7.26%

+1.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.35%

-14.02%

+4.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.12%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.93%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.36%

0.00%

-0.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.39%

-1.19%

-2.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.44%

1.79%

-0.35%

Volatility

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio (XBAL.TO) is 3.14%, while CI Equity Asset Allocation ETF (CEQT.TO) has a volatility of 3.70%. This indicates that XBAL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CEQT.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XBAL.TOCEQT.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.14%

3.70%

-0.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.21%

8.81%

-1.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.51%

10.58%

-2.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.79%

13.11%

-4.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.37%

13.11%

-3.74%

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBAL.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CEQT.TO's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBAL.TO vs. CEQT.TO - Dividend Comparison

XBAL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.10%, more than CEQT.TO's 0.90% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CEQT.TO
CI Equity Asset Allocation ETF		0.90%1.25%1.82%1.06%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XBAL.TO
iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio		2.10%2.24%2.68%2.40%2.09%1.74%1.99%2.26%3.39%2.93%3.64%3.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

XBAL.TO and CEQT.TO have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XBAL.TO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XBAL.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CEQT.TO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and CI. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XBAL.TO and 0.30% for CEQT.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XBAL.TO and CEQT.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