XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO
XCLN.TO (iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF) and BND.TO (Purpose Global Bond Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - XCLN.TO is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while BND.TO is a fund fund. Over the past 3 years, XCLN.TO returned 8.97%/yr vs 7.22%/yr for BND.TO. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCLN.TO achieves a 43.07% return, which is significantly higher than BND.TO's 0.89% return.
XCLN.TO
- 1D
- -0.93%
- 1M
- 14.72%
- YTD
- 43.07%
- 6M
- 37.48%
- 1Y
- 84.30%
- 3Y*
- 8.97%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BND.TO
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- 0.77%
- YTD
- 0.89%
- 6M
- 1.18%
- 1Y
- 6.14%
- 3Y*
- 7.22%
- 5Y*
- 3.27%
- 10Y*
- 3.00%
XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XCLN.TO iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF | 43.07% | 37.41% | -19.86% | -21.98% | 13.22% |
BND.TO Purpose Global Bond Fund | 0.89% | 7.23% | 7.49% | 8.45% | -1.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between XCLN.TO and BND.TO is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2022 | 0.18 |
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
XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XCLN.TO
BND.TO
XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF (XCLN.TO) and Purpose Global Bond Fund (BND.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.
| XCLN.TO | BND.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.49 | 1.38 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.00 | 2.17 | +4.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.91 | 8.87 | +11.04 |
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
| XCLN.TO | BND.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.15 | 2.02 | +1.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.64 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.59 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 0.61 | -0.28 |
Drawdowns
XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCLN.TO drawdown since its inception was -49.29%, which is greater than BND.TO's maximum drawdown of -16.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCLN.TO and BND.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCLN.TO | BND.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.29% | -16.55% | -32.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.10% | -2.84% | -9.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -39.31% | -4.46% | -34.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.23% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -16.55% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.98% | -0.45% | -0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.54% | -2.07% | -23.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.25% | 0.69% | +3.56% |
Volatility
XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF (XCLN.TO) has a higher volatility of 10.50% compared to Purpose Global Bond Fund (BND.TO) at 1.35%. This indicates that XCLN.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BND.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XCLN.TO | BND.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.50% | 1.35% | +9.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.24% | 2.52% | +17.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.95% | 3.06% | +23.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.50% | 5.10% | +20.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.50% | 5.15% | +20.35% |
Dividends
XCLN.TO vs. BND.TO - Dividend Comparison
XCLN.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than BND.TO's 5.86% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BND.TO Purpose Global Bond Fund | 5.86% | 5.70% | 5.24% | 5.20% | 4.14% | 3.89% | 3.48% | 3.11% | 3.96% | 3.47% | 3.26% | 0.53% |
XCLN.TO iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF | 1.04% | 1.49% | 1.24% | 1.15% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XCLN.TO and BND.TO have a correlation of 0.11, 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 XCLN.TO and BND.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