PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

XBM.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF) and CJP.NEO (iShares Japan Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - XBM.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Can Natural Resource NR CAD, while CJP.NEO is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI Japan Canadian Dollar Hedged Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XBM.TO returned 19.65%/yr vs 16.37%/yr for CJP.NEO. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XBM.TO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for CJP.NEO.

Performance

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) and iShares Japan Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CJP.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBM.TO achieves a 31.10% return, which is significantly higher than CJP.NEO's 17.05% return. Over the past 10 years, XBM.TO has outperformed CJP.NEO with an annualized return of 19.65%, while CJP.NEO has yielded a comparatively lower 16.37% annualized return.

XBM.TO

1D
2.73%
1M
-1.40%
YTD
31.10%
6M
38.65%
1Y
103.40%
3Y*
26.59%
5Y*
17.84%
10Y*
19.65%

CJP.NEO

1D
2.51%
1M
0.99%
YTD
17.05%
6M
17.74%
1Y
49.90%
3Y*
27.93%
5Y*
22.66%
10Y*
16.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XBM.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF		31.10%50.69%5.96%2.84%3.63%27.94%31.53%9.95%-22.42%32.48%
CJP.NEO
iShares Japan Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		17.05%30.67%26.74%35.03%3.67%18.19%0.18%13.12%-17.35%21.33%

Correlation

The correlation between XBM.TO and CJP.NEO 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

0.35

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

0.37

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2011

0.35

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF

iShares Japan Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with XBM.TO:
XBM.TO vs. XMEXBM.TO vs. ZMT.TOXBM.TO vs. XEG.TOXBM.TO vs. XETM.TOXBM.TO vs. GDXXBM.TO vs. XMA.TOXBM.TO vs. VDE
Often compared with CJP.NEO:
CJP.NEO vs. ZJPN.TOCJP.NEO vs. JAPN.TOCJP.NEO vs. VCE.TOCJP.NEO vs. EWJCJP.NEO vs. FLJPCJP.NEO vs. XEQT.TOCJP.NEO vs. AGF-B.TO

Return for Risk

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XBM.TO
XBM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
CJP.NEO
CJP.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
CJP.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CJP.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
CJP.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
CJP.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
CJP.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) and iShares Japan Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CJP.NEO). 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.

XBM.TOCJP.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.76
2.76

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.09
3.65

-0.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.51

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.35

4.58

-0.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.08

17.20

-1.13

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is comparable to the CJP.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBM.TO and CJP.NEO, 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

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBM.TO drawdown since its inception was -67.53%, which is greater than CJP.NEO's maximum drawdown of -38.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBM.TO and CJP.NEO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XBM.TOCJP.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.53%

-38.36%

-29.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.88%

-10.99%

-12.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-37.45%

-20.86%

-16.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.57%

-20.86%

-19.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-57.25%

-37.75%

-19.50%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.34%

-1.88%

-6.46%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.09%

-11.15%

-14.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.46%

2.92%

+3.54%

Volatility

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) has a higher volatility of 17.03% compared to iShares Japan Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CJP.NEO) at 5.03%. This indicates that XBM.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CJP.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XBM.TOCJP.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

17.03%

5.03%

+12.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.15%

13.58%

+18.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

37.63%

18.26%

+19.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

33.55%

18.37%

+15.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.88%

19.59%

+13.29%

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBM.TO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than CJP.NEO's 0.71% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBM.TO vs. CJP.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XBM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than CJP.NEO's 1.26% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CJP.NEO
iShares Japan Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		1.26%1.48%1.71%1.24%1.96%1.56%1.97%2.42%2.38%1.48%0.97%0.84%
XBM.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF		0.65%0.86%1.25%2.09%4.78%3.05%1.81%3.73%3.38%1.65%2.41%5.75%

Frequently Asked Questions

XBM.TO and CJP.NEO 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, XBM.TO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XBM.TO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for CJP.NEO.

XBM.TO is categorized as Energy Equities, while CJP.NEO is Japan Equities. XBM.TO tracks Morningstar Can Natural Resource NR CAD, while CJP.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Japan Canadian Dollar Hedged Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for XBM.TO and 0.71% for CJP.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XBM.TO and CJP.NEO

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