XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XCLN.TO (iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF) and CCOM.TO (CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units) are both exchange-traded funds - XCLN.TO is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while CCOM.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Auspice Broad Commodity Excess Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XCLN.TO returned 8.97%/yr vs 6.60%/yr for CCOM.TO. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XCLN.TO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.73%/yr for CCOM.TO.

Performance

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF (XCLN.TO) and CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCLN.TO achieves a 43.07% return, which is significantly higher than CCOM.TO's 14.12% return.

XCLN.TO

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: 14.72%
• YTD: 43.07%
• 6M: 37.48%
• 1Y: 84.30%
• 3Y*: 8.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CCOM.TO

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: -1.57%
• YTD: 14.12%
• 6M: 13.88%
• 1Y: 21.03%
• 3Y*: 6.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.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%	0.56%
CCOM.TO CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units	14.12%	6.96%	5.90%	-2.46%	1.40%

Correlation

The correlation between XCLN.TO and CCOM.TO is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2022	0.12

Return for Risk

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

XCLN.TO

XCLN.TO Risk / Return Rank: 88
XCLN.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
XCLN.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
XCLN.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
XCLN.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
XCLN.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 89

CCOM.TO

CCOM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 70
CCOM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
CCOM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
CCOM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 67
CCOM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
CCOM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.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 CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.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	CCOM.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.15	2.11	+1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.78	2.76	+1.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.41	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.00	4.75	+2.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.91	14.22	+5.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCLN.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.15, which is higher than the CCOM.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCLN.TO and CCOM.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XCLN.TO	CCOM.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.15	2.11	+1.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	0.82	-0.49

Drawdowns

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCLN.TO drawdown since its inception was -49.29%, which is greater than CCOM.TO's maximum drawdown of -9.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCLN.TO and CCOM.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCLN.TO	CCOM.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.29%	-9.79%	-39.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.10%	-4.45%	-7.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-39.31%	-8.18%	-31.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.98%	-4.45%	+3.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.54%	-2.96%	-22.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.25%	1.48%	+2.77%

Volatility

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF (XCLN.TO) has a higher volatility of 10.50% compared to CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units (CCOM.TO) at 4.71%. This indicates that XCLN.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCOM.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCLN.TO	CCOM.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.50%	4.71%	+5.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.24%	8.36%	+11.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.95%	10.02%	+16.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.50%	8.42%	+17.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.50%	8.42%	+17.08%

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCLN.TO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CCOM.TO's 0.73% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCLN.TO vs. CCOM.TO - Dividend Comparison

XCLN.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than CCOM.TO's 7.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CCOM.TO CI Auspice Broad Commodity Fund ETF Hedged Units	7.35%	3.48%	6.99%	4.21%	0.00%
XCLN.TO iShares Global Clean Energy Index ETF	1.04%	1.49%	1.24%	1.15%	0.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCLN.TO and CCOM.TO in my portfolio?

XCLN.TO and CCOM.TO have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XCLN.TO or CCOM.TO?

On fees, XCLN.TO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCLN.TO or CCOM.TO?

XCLN.TO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CCOM.TO.

What is the main difference between XCLN.TO and CCOM.TO?

XCLN.TO is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while CCOM.TO is Commodities. XCLN.TO tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while CCOM.TO tracks Auspice Broad Commodity Excess Return Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and CI. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XCLN.TO and 0.73% for CCOM.TO.