PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XEC.TO (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF) and XQQ.TO (iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - XEC.TO is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Morningstar EM GR CAD, while XQQ.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Morningstar US Market TR CAD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XEC.TO returned 10.71%/yr vs 19.70%/yr for XQQ.TO. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XEC.TO charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for XQQ.TO.

Performance

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF (XEC.TO) and iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XEC.TO achieves a 27.92% return, which is significantly higher than XQQ.TO's 19.81% return. Over the past 10 years, XEC.TO has underperformed XQQ.TO with an annualized return of 10.71%, while XQQ.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.70% annualized return.

XEC.TO

1D
-0.88%
1M
10.15%
YTD
27.92%
6M
28.48%
1Y
54.44%
3Y*
24.69%
5Y*
10.21%
10Y*
10.71%

XQQ.TO

1D
-0.27%
1M
10.58%
YTD
19.81%
6M
18.06%
1Y
38.49%
3Y*
26.43%
5Y*
15.31%
10Y*
19.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XEC.TO
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF		27.92%25.78%16.14%7.92%-14.68%-1.74%15.08%11.53%-8.26%27.93%
XQQ.TO
iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		19.81%18.38%24.23%52.23%-33.67%22.29%45.23%37.48%-2.33%31.83%

Correlation

The correlation between XEC.TO and XQQ.TO is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.70

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

0.60

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

0.56

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

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2013

0.56

The correlation between XEC.TO and XQQ.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (all time) to 0.70 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XEC.TO
XQQ.TO

Technology

35.0%
53.7%

Financial Services

18.4%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
12.2%

Industrials

9.0%
3.1%

Basic Materials

6.9%
1.1%

Communication Services

6.4%
15.8%

Energy

3.9%
0.6%

Healthcare

3.7%
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.3%
7.7%

Utilities

2.2%
1.4%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.1%

Technology

XEC.TO
35.0%
XQQ.TO
53.7%

Financial Services

XEC.TO
18.4%
XQQ.TO
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

XEC.TO
9.6%
XQQ.TO
12.2%

Industrials

XEC.TO
9.0%
XQQ.TO
3.1%

Basic Materials

XEC.TO
6.9%
XQQ.TO
1.1%

Communication Services

XEC.TO
6.4%
XQQ.TO
15.8%

Energy

XEC.TO
3.9%
XQQ.TO
0.6%

Healthcare

XEC.TO
3.7%
XQQ.TO
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

XEC.TO
3.3%
XQQ.TO
7.7%

Utilities

XEC.TO
2.2%
XQQ.TO
1.4%

Real Estate

XEC.TO
1.7%
XQQ.TO
0.1%

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 MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with XEC.TO:
XEC.TO vs. XEF.TOXEC.TO vs. VEE.TOXEC.TO vs. XEM.TOXEC.TO vs. ZEM.TOXEC.TO vs. XEQT.TOXEC.TO vs. VFV.TOXEC.TO vs. XIC.TO
Often compared with XQQ.TO:
XQQ.TO vs. QQC.TOXQQ.TO vs. VFV.TOXQQ.TO vs. HXQ.TOXQQ.TO vs. XQQU.TOXQQ.TO vs. QQQXQQ.TO vs. ZQQ.TOXQQ.TO vs. TEC.TO

Return for Risk

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XEC.TO
XEC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
XEC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO
XQQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
XQQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF (XEC.TO) and iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.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.

XEC.TOXQQ.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.01
2.45

+0.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.86
3.20

+0.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.42

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.86

3.03

+1.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.00

11.31

+5.69

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

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XEC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.01, which is comparable to the XQQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XEC.TO and XQQ.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

XEC.TOXQQ.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01

2.45

+0.56

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.68

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.89

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.86

-0.34

Drawdowns

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XEC.TO drawdown since its inception was -32.54%, smaller than the maximum XQQ.TO drawdown of -38.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XEC.TO and XQQ.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XEC.TOXQQ.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.54%

-38.55%

+6.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.25%

-12.76%

+1.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.07%

-22.72%

+7.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.14%

-38.55%

+9.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.54%

-38.55%

+6.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.88%

-0.27%

-0.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.56%

-5.92%

-3.64%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.21%

3.41%

-0.20%

Volatility

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF (XEC.TO) has a higher volatility of 7.80% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO) at 4.48%. This indicates that XEC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XQQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XEC.TOXQQ.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.80%

4.48%

+3.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.85%

12.00%

+3.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.19%

15.82%

+2.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.91%

22.52%

-6.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.60%

22.34%

-4.74%

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XEC.TO has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than XQQ.TO's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

XEC.TO vs. XQQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

XEC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, more than XQQ.TO's 0.21% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XEC.TO
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF		1.50%1.92%2.03%2.16%2.28%2.78%1.64%2.87%2.66%2.13%1.80%2.19%
XQQ.TO
iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.21%0.25%0.32%0.31%0.43%0.17%0.26%0.46%0.52%0.53%0.76%0.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

XEC.TO and XQQ.TO have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XEC.TO is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEC.TO is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for XQQ.TO.

XEC.TO is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while XQQ.TO is Nasdaq-100. XEC.TO tracks Morningstar EM GR CAD, while XQQ.TO tracks Morningstar US Market TR CAD. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for XEC.TO and 0.39% for XQQ.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XEC.TO and XQQ.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