XBM.TO vs. RGPM.NEO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XBM.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF) and RGPM.NEO (RBC Global Precious Metals Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - XBM.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Can Natural Resource NR CAD, while RGPM.NEO is a Precious Metals fund actively managed by RBC Global Asset Management.. XBM.TO is passively managed, while RGPM.NEO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XBM.TO returned 29.93%/yr vs 45.22%/yr for RGPM.NEO. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XBM.TO charges 0.60%/yr vs 1.02%/yr for RGPM.NEO.

Performance

XBM.TO vs. RGPM.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 RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBM.TO achieves a 38.48% return, which is significantly higher than RGPM.NEO's 1.34% return.

XBM.TO

• 1D: -3.17%
• 1M: 21.23%
• YTD: 38.48%
• 6M: 46.72%
• 1Y: 119.30%
• 3Y*: 29.93%
• 5Y*: 19.70%
• 10Y*: 20.17%

RGPM.NEO

• 1D: -2.71%
• 1M: 0.98%
• YTD: 1.34%
• 6M: 8.72%
• 1Y: 60.56%
• 3Y*: 45.22%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XBM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF	38.48%	50.69%	5.96%	-11.93%
RGPM.NEO RBC Global Precious Metals Fund	1.34%	143.89%	36.75%	-3.95%

Correlation

The correlation between XBM.TO and RGPM.NEO is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023	0.32

Over the past year, XBM.TO and RGPM.NEO have become more correlated (0.54) than their long-term average of 0.32, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

XBM.TO vs. RGPM.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: 85
XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
XBM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
XBM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 80
XBM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XBM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 88

RGPM.NEO

RGPM.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 39
RGPM.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
RGPM.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
RGPM.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 42
RGPM.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
RGPM.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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. RGPM.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 RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.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.

	XBM.TO	RGPM.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.37	1.42	+1.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.67	1.79	+1.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.27	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.02	2.07	+2.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.44	5.61	+13.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is higher than the RGPM.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBM.TO and RGPM.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XBM.TO	RGPM.NEO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.37	1.42	+1.95
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.62	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.25	1.34	-1.09

Drawdowns

XBM.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBM.TO drawdown since its inception was -67.40%, which is greater than RGPM.NEO's maximum drawdown of -29.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBM.TO and RGPM.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBM.TO	RGPM.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.40%	-29.46%	-37.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.88%	-29.46%	+5.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.45%	-29.46%	-7.99%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.57%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.17%	-23.85%	+20.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.80%	-8.38%	-17.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.16%	10.82%	-4.66%

Volatility

XBM.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) is 13.03%, while RBC Global Precious Metals Fund (RGPM.NEO) has a volatility of 16.07%. This indicates that XBM.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RGPM.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XBM.TO	RGPM.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.03%	16.07%	-3.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.68%	35.62%	-5.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.62%	42.98%	-7.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.06%	32.73%	+0.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.66%	32.73%	-0.07%

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

XBM.TO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than RGPM.NEO's 1.02% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBM.TO vs. RGPM.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XBM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, while RGPM.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RGPM.NEO RBC Global Precious Metals Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XBM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF	0.62%	0.86%	1.25%	2.09%	4.83%	3.01%	1.81%	3.71%	3.43%	1.63%	2.42%	5.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBM.TO and RGPM.NEO in my portfolio?

XBM.TO and RGPM.NEO have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XBM.TO or RGPM.NEO?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBM.TO or RGPM.NEO?

XBM.TO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.

What is the main difference between XBM.TO and RGPM.NEO?

XBM.TO is categorized as Energy Equities, while RGPM.NEO is Precious Metals. They also come from different issuers: iShares and RBC Global Asset Management.. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for XBM.TO and 1.02% for RGPM.NEO.