PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XCNS.TO (iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio) and HBAL.TO (Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XCNS.TO returned 5.71%/yr vs 7.93%/yr for HBAL.TO. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.20% expense ratio.

Performance

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO - 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 Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF (HBAL.TO). 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 HBAL.TO's 8.04% 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*
—

HBAL.TO

1D
-0.11%
1M
4.73%
YTD
8.04%
6M
8.08%
1Y
19.77%
3Y*
14.75%
5Y*
7.93%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
XCNS.TO
iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio		5.57%9.44%11.73%10.66%-11.25%5.93%10.28%3.45%
HBAL.TO
Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF		8.04%13.57%16.65%15.57%-17.70%14.70%15.50%7.74%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNS.TO and HBAL.TO is 0.88, 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

0.88

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

0.82

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2019

0.71

The correlation between XCNS.TO and HBAL.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (all time) to 0.88 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XCNS.TO
HBAL.TO

Technology

12.2%
23.7%

Financial Services

9.4%
20.4%

Industrials

3.6%
10.7%

Communication Services

3.1%
7.2%

Energy

3.1%
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

3.1%
8.3%

Basic Materials

2.7%
6.0%

Healthcare

2.4%
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
5.4%

Utilities

0.7%
2.9%

Real Estate

0.2%
1.6%

Technology

XCNS.TO
12.2%
HBAL.TO
23.7%

Financial Services

XCNS.TO
9.4%
HBAL.TO
20.4%

Industrials

XCNS.TO
3.6%
HBAL.TO
10.7%

Communication Services

XCNS.TO
3.1%
HBAL.TO
7.2%

Energy

XCNS.TO
3.1%
HBAL.TO
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

XCNS.TO
3.1%
HBAL.TO
8.3%

Basic Materials

XCNS.TO
2.7%
HBAL.TO
6.0%

Healthcare

XCNS.TO
2.4%
HBAL.TO
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

XCNS.TO
1.7%
HBAL.TO
5.4%

Utilities

XCNS.TO
0.7%
HBAL.TO
2.9%

Real Estate

XCNS.TO
0.2%
HBAL.TO
1.6%

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

Global X Balanced Asset Allocation 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 HBAL.TO:
HBAL.TO vs. PYF.TOHBAL.TO vs. TCON.TOHBAL.TO vs. ZESG.TOHBAL.TO vs. ZBAL.TOHBAL.TO vs. CSBG.NEOHBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEOHBAL.TO vs. MIX.TO

Return for Risk

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO — 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
HBAL.TO
HBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
HBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
HBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
HBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
HBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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. HBAL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (XCNS.TO) and Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF (HBAL.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.

XCNS.TOHBAL.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.92
2.53

-0.61

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.75
3.63

-0.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.49

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

3.42

-0.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.25

14.23

-3.98

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. HBAL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCNS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the HBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNS.TO and HBAL.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XCNS.TOHBAL.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

2.53

-0.61

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

0.76

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

0.77

+0.09

Drawdowns

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNS.TO drawdown since its inception was -16.96%, smaller than the maximum HBAL.TO drawdown of -22.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNS.TO and HBAL.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XCNS.TOHBAL.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.96%

-22.49%

+5.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.86%

-5.80%

+0.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.40%

-9.29%

+2.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.09%

-22.11%

+6.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.79%

-0.11%

-0.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.49%

-4.53%

+1.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.24%

1.39%

-0.15%

Volatility

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core Conservative Balanced ETF Portfolio (XCNS.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.14% compared to Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF (HBAL.TO) at 2.59%. This indicates that XCNS.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HBAL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XCNS.TOHBAL.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.14%

2.59%

+0.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.72%

6.55%

-0.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.67%

7.86%

-1.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.86%

10.49%

-3.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.61%

12.13%

-4.52%

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XCNS.TO and HBAL.TO have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XCNS.TO vs. HBAL.TO - Dividend Comparison

XCNS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, more than HBAL.TO's 2.25% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
HBAL.TO
Global X Balanced Asset Allocation ETF		2.25%2.41%2.28%1.08%0.02%0.06%0.04%0.19%
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 HBAL.TO have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XCNS.TO and HBAL.TO have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCNS.TO and HBAL.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