PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.NEO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XCNS.TO (iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio) and FGRO.NEO (Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XCNS.TO returned 5.71%/yr vs 14.57%/yr for FGRO.NEO. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XCNS.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for FGRO.NEO.

Performance

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.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 Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF (FGRO.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCNS.TO achieves a 5.57% return, which is significantly lower than FGRO.NEO's 8.81% return.

XCNS.TO

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

FGRO.NEO

1D
-0.37%
1M
3.27%
YTD
8.81%
6M
9.01%
1Y
21.34%
3Y*
20.93%
5Y*
14.57%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.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%5.17%
FGRO.NEO
Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF		8.81%17.00%25.97%16.92%-6.29%16.51%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNS.TO and FGRO.NEO is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.82

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

0.78

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

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2021

0.71

The correlation between XCNS.TO and FGRO.NEO shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (5 years) to 0.82 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.NEO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XCNS.TO
FGRO.NEO

Technology

12.2%
20.6%

Financial Services

9.4%
22.2%

Industrials

3.6%
11.3%

Communication Services

3.1%
4.8%

Energy

3.1%
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

3.1%
7.7%

Basic Materials

2.7%
9.7%

Healthcare

2.4%
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
5.5%

Utilities

0.7%
4.6%

Real Estate

0.2%
4.7%

Technology

XCNS.TO
12.2%
FGRO.NEO
20.6%

Financial Services

XCNS.TO
9.4%
FGRO.NEO
22.2%

Industrials

XCNS.TO
3.6%
FGRO.NEO
11.3%

Communication Services

XCNS.TO
3.1%
FGRO.NEO
4.8%

Energy

XCNS.TO
3.1%
FGRO.NEO
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XCNS.TO
3.1%
FGRO.NEO
7.7%

Basic Materials

XCNS.TO
2.7%
FGRO.NEO
9.7%

Healthcare

XCNS.TO
2.4%
FGRO.NEO
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

XCNS.TO
1.7%
FGRO.NEO
5.5%

Utilities

XCNS.TO
0.7%
FGRO.NEO
4.6%

Real Estate

XCNS.TO
0.2%
FGRO.NEO
4.7%

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

Fidelity All-in-One Growth 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 FGRO.NEO:
FGRO.NEO vs. VGRO.TOFGRO.NEO vs. XGRO.TOFGRO.NEO vs. FBAL.NEOFGRO.NEO vs. VEQT.TOFGRO.NEO vs. ZGRO.TOFGRO.NEO vs. FGROFGRO.NEO vs. VFV.TO

Return for Risk

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.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
FGRO.NEO
FGRO.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
FGRO.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
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.

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.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 Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF (FGRO.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.TOFGRO.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.92
2.22

-0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.75
3.14

-0.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.42

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

2.84

-0.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.25

12.13

-1.88

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. FGRO.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCNS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the FGRO.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNS.TO and FGRO.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XCNS.TOFGRO.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

2.22

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

1.38

-0.55

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

1.37

-0.51

Drawdowns

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNS.TO drawdown since its inception was -16.96%, which is greater than FGRO.NEO's maximum drawdown of -15.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNS.TO and FGRO.NEO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XCNS.TOFGRO.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.96%

-15.23%

-1.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.86%

-7.54%

+2.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.40%

-11.45%

+5.05%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.09%

-15.23%

-0.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.79%

-0.90%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.49%

-2.53%

-0.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.24%

1.76%

-0.52%

Volatility

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (XCNS.TO) is 3.14%, while Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF (FGRO.NEO) has a volatility of 3.56%. This indicates that XCNS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FGRO.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XCNS.TOFGRO.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.14%

3.56%

-0.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.72%

7.75%

-2.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.67%

9.65%

-2.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.86%

10.59%

-3.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.61%

10.47%

-2.86%

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

XCNS.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than FGRO.NEO's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCNS.TO vs. FGRO.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XCNS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, more than FGRO.NEO's 1.14% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
FGRO.NEO
Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF		1.14%1.24%1.09%1.39%4.58%0.94%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 FGRO.NEO have a correlation of 0.82, 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 0.42% for FGRO.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XCNS.TO and 0.42% for FGRO.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCNS.TO and FGRO.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