XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

XDU.TO (iShares Core MSCI US Quality Dividend Index ETF) and FCCQ.TO (Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF) are both Quality Factor funds - XDU.TO tracks the Morningstar US Market TR CAD while FCCQ.TO tracks the Fidelity Canada Canadian High Quality Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XDU.TO returned 9.52%/yr vs 13.37%/yr for FCCQ.TO. Their 0.31 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XDU.TO charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for FCCQ.TO.

Performance

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI US Quality Dividend Index ETF (XDU.TO) and Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF (FCCQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDU.TO achieves a 17.37% return, which is significantly higher than FCCQ.TO's 8.28% return.

XDU.TO

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: -0.32%
• 6M: 10.78%
• YTD: 17.37%
• 1Y: 20.73%
• 3Y*: 11.91%
• 5Y*: 9.52%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.04%

FCCQ.TO

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: 0.29%
• 6M: 8.68%
• YTD: 8.28%
• 1Y: 31.29%
• 3Y*: 21.78%
• 5Y*: 13.37%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.61%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FCCQ.TO Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF	CA$101.79K	CA$82.56K	CA$89.46K
XDU.TO iShares Core MSCI US Quality Dividend Index ETF	CA$87.34K	CA$130.76K	CA$120.57K

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
XDU.TO iShares Core MSCI US Quality Dividend Index ETF	17.37%	2.51%	14.32%	3.75%	-3.70%	28.08%	-0.76%	13.67%
FCCQ.TO Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF	8.28%	32.22%	21.60%	11.04%	-7.50%	22.27%	1.92%	9.55%

Correlation

The correlation between XDU.TO and FCCQ.TO is 0.29, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.39
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2019	0.31

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XDU.TO	FCCQ.TO
Healthcare	20.2%	4.0%
Industrials	14.5%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	13.7%	5.6%
Technology	13.0%	13.5%
Energy	10.2%	10.1%
Financial Services	10.2%	25.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	4.4%
Utilities	3.6%	-
Communication Services	3.6%	-
Basic Materials	1.8%	18.2%
Real Estate	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XDU.TO

XDU.TO Risk / Return Rank: 75
XDU.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
XDU.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
XDU.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 73
XDU.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
XDU.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 73

FCCQ.TO

FCCQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 82
FCCQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
FCCQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
FCCQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 84
FCCQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
FCCQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 81

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI US Quality Dividend Index ETF (XDU.TO) and Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF (FCCQ.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	XDU.TO	FCCQ.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.73	2.04	-0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	2.66	-0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.36	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.21	2.71	+0.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.43	10.70	-1.27

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDU.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is comparable to the FCCQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDU.TO and FCCQ.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.

Drawdowns

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDU.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.56%, smaller than the maximum FCCQ.TO drawdown of -35.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDU.TO and FCCQ.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XDU.TO	FCCQ.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.56%	-35.56%	+7.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.13%	-11.29%	+5.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.67%	-13.41%	-3.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.67%	-17.96%	+1.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	-1.17%	-0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.93%	-3.98%	-1.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	2.86%	-0.77%

Volatility

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core MSCI US Quality Dividend Index ETF (XDU.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.31% compared to Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF (FCCQ.TO) at 3.60%. This indicates that XDU.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCCQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XDU.TO	FCCQ.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.31%	3.60%	+0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.79%	11.48%	-3.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.40%	15.04%	-3.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.54%	13.79%	+4.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.89%	16.03%	+12.86%

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDU.TO has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than FCCQ.TO's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

XDU.TO vs. FCCQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

XDU.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.42%, more than FCCQ.TO's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCCQ.TO Fidelity Canadian High Quality ETF	1.47%	1.44%	1.85%	2.41%	2.33%	1.92%	2.14%	2.33%	0.00%	0.00%
XDU.TO iShares Core MSCI US Quality Dividend Index ETF	2.42%	2.54%	2.31%	2.53%	2.25%	2.13%	2.99%	2.54%	2.49%	1.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XDU.TO and FCCQ.TO in my portfolio?

XDU.TO and FCCQ.TO have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XDU.TO or FCCQ.TO?

On fees, XDU.TO is cheaper at 0.16% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XDU.TO or FCCQ.TO?

XDU.TO is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for FCCQ.TO.

What is the main difference between XDU.TO and FCCQ.TO?

XDU.TO tracks Morningstar US Market TR CAD, while FCCQ.TO tracks Fidelity Canada Canadian High Quality Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XDU.TO and 0.35% for FCCQ.TO.