PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XCNS.TO (iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio) and CSBG.NEO (CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XCNS.TO returned 10.96%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for CSBG.NEO. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. XCNS.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for CSBG.NEO.

Performance

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (XCNS.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

XCNS.TO

1D
-0.26%
1M
3.19%
YTD
5.57%
6M
4.19%
1Y
12.72%
3Y*
10.96%
5Y*
5.71%
10Y*
—

CSBG.NEO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
0.00%
6M
0.00%
1Y
0.00%
3Y*
0.80%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
XCNS.TO
iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio		5.57%9.44%11.73%10.66%-11.25%2.03%
CSBG.NEO
CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF		0.00%0.00%1.17%1.22%1.69%2.60%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNS.TO and CSBG.NEO is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

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

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 20, 2021

-0.01

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 Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio

CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF

Often compared with XCNS.TO:
XCNS.TO vs. XBAL.TOXCNS.TO vs. XINC.TOXCNS.TO vs. VCNS.TOXCNS.TO vs. XEQT.TOXCNS.TO vs. GCNS.TOXCNS.TO vs. XGRO.TOXCNS.TO vs. XTR.TO
Often compared with CSBG.NEO:
CSBG.NEO vs. CEQT.TOCSBG.NEO vs. GRO.TOCSBG.NEO vs. PYF.TOCSBG.NEO vs. TCON.TOCSBG.NEO vs. HBAL.TOCSBG.NEO vs. ATMPCSBG.NEO vs. CCAD.TO

Return for Risk

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XCNS.TO
XCNS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
XCNS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCNS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCNS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
XCNS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCNS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
CSBG.NEO
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.

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (XCNS.TO) and CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.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.

XCNS.TOCSBG.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.92

—

—

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.75

—

—

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

—

—

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

—

—

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.25

—

—

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

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XCNS.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

1.08

-0.22

Drawdowns

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNS.TO drawdown since its inception was -16.96%, which is greater than CSBG.NEO's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNS.TO and CSBG.NEO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XCNS.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.96%

0.00%

-16.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.86%

0.00%

-4.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.40%

0.00%

-6.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.09%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.79%

0.00%

-0.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.49%

0.00%

-3.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.24%

0.00%

+1.24%

Volatility

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (XCNS.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.14% compared to CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF (CSBG.NEO) at 0.00%. This indicates that XCNS.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSBG.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XCNS.TOCSBG.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.14%

0.00%

+3.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.72%

0.00%

+5.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.67%

0.00%

+6.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.86%

1.27%

+5.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.61%

1.27%

+6.34%

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCNS.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CSBG.NEO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCNS.TO vs. CSBG.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XCNS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, while CSBG.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CSBG.NEO
CIBC Sustainable Balanced Growth Solution ETF		0.00%0.00%1.16%1.21%1.66%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XCNS.TO
iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio		2.50%2.55%2.58%2.49%2.26%1.81%2.15%0.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

XCNS.TO and CSBG.NEO have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XCNS.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and CIBC. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XCNS.TO and 0.90% for CSBG.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCNS.TO and CSBG.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