PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XEB.TO (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and HUC.TO (Global X Crude Oil ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XEB.TO is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Hedged in CAD Index, while HUC.TO is a Commodities fund tracking the Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XEB.TO returned 1.44%/yr vs 8.13%/yr for HUC.TO. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XEB.TO charges 0.53%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for HUC.TO.

Performance

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XEB.TO) and Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XEB.TO achieves a 0.81% return, which is significantly lower than HUC.TO's 42.05% return. Over the past 10 years, XEB.TO has underperformed HUC.TO with an annualized return of 1.44%, while HUC.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 8.13% annualized return.

XEB.TO

1D
0.18%
1M
0.79%
YTD
0.81%
6M
0.94%
1Y
8.75%
3Y*
7.28%
5Y*
-0.04%
10Y*
1.44%

HUC.TO

1D
-2.03%
1M
-1.85%
YTD
42.05%
6M
37.99%
1Y
37.42%
3Y*
11.54%
5Y*
12.86%
10Y*
8.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XEB.TO
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.81%11.14%3.46%8.58%-19.80%-3.14%2.97%13.37%-7.43%8.80%
HUC.TO
Global X Crude Oil ETF		42.05%-13.63%7.23%-2.89%26.25%57.81%-21.10%19.75%-11.68%-3.47%

Correlation

The correlation between XEB.TO and HUC.TO is -0.35, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

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

-0.35

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

-0.12

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

-0.00

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2011

0.13

The correlation between XEB.TO and HUC.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.35 (1 year) to 0.13 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Global X Crude Oil ETF

Often compared with XEB.TO:
XEB.TO vs. TDB.TOXEB.TO vs. XCB.TOXEB.TO vs. XLB.TOXEB.TO vs. ZAG.TOXEB.TO vs. VBG.NEOXEB.TO vs. XIC.TOXEB.TO vs. XUS.TO
Often compared with HUC.TO:
HUC.TO vs. HXS.TOHUC.TO vs. HUN.TOHUC.TO vs. XBM.TOHUC.TO vs. CCOM.TOHUC.TO vs. ZCOM.NEOHUC.TO vs. COW.TOHUC.TO vs. PPA

Return for Risk

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XEB.TO
XEB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
XEB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank
HUC.TO
HUC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
HUC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
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.

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XEB.TO) and Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.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.

XEB.TOHUC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.42
1.48

-0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.10
1.97

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.27

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.78

2.32

-0.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.91

4.59

+2.32

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

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XEB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is comparable to the HUC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XEB.TO and HUC.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

XEB.TOHUC.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.42

1.48

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.00

0.46

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.14

0.28

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.13

+0.17

Drawdowns

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XEB.TO drawdown since its inception was -29.53%, smaller than the maximum HUC.TO drawdown of -76.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XEB.TO and HUC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XEB.TOHUC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.53%

-76.99%

+47.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.94%

-16.20%

+11.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.26%

-23.83%

+15.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.47%

-30.83%

+1.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-29.53%

-61.56%

+32.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.23%

-4.77%

+2.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.46%

-34.60%

+28.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.27%

8.18%

-6.91%

Volatility

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XEB.TO) is 2.47%, while Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.TO) has a volatility of 11.36%. This indicates that XEB.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HUC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XEB.TOHUC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.47%

11.36%

-8.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.89%

21.24%

-16.35%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.17%

25.42%

-19.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.52%

27.87%

-18.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.21%

29.04%

-18.83%

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XEB.TO has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is lower than HUC.TO's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

XEB.TO vs. HUC.TO - Dividend Comparison

XEB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.97%, while HUC.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HUC.TO
Global X Crude Oil ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XEB.TO
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		4.97%4.98%4.68%4.00%4.26%3.23%3.45%3.65%4.95%3.81%4.31%4.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

XEB.TO and HUC.TO have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XEB.TO is cheaper at 0.53% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEB.TO is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for HUC.TO.

XEB.TO is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while HUC.TO is Commodities. XEB.TO tracks J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Hedged in CAD Index, while HUC.TO tracks Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for XEB.TO and 1.09% for HUC.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XEB.TO and HUC.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