PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XEG.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index ETF) and CIF.TO (iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF) are both Energy Equities funds from iShares - XEG.TO tracks the S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index while CIF.TO tracks the Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XEG.TO returned 11.85%/yr vs 12.99%/yr for CIF.TO. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XEG.TO charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CIF.TO.

Performance

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index ETF (XEG.TO) and iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XEG.TO achieves a 44.34% return, which is significantly higher than CIF.TO's 25.20% return. Over the past 10 years, XEG.TO has underperformed CIF.TO with an annualized return of 11.85%, while CIF.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 12.99% annualized return.

XEG.TO

1D
1.17%
1M
-0.04%
YTD
44.34%
6M
39.73%
1Y
70.40%
3Y*
28.08%
5Y*
29.48%
10Y*
11.85%

CIF.TO

1D
1.03%
1M
3.28%
YTD
25.20%
6M
16.23%
1Y
35.22%
3Y*
25.10%
5Y*
18.52%
10Y*
12.99%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XEG.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index ETF		44.34%16.72%14.08%3.52%53.25%83.71%-34.41%8.98%-27.05%-11.18%
CIF.TO
iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF		25.20%14.45%25.40%14.65%5.90%17.73%-0.62%23.55%-5.46%2.34%

Correlation

The correlation between XEG.TO and CIF.TO is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.16

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

0.33

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

0.39

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

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2008

0.42

Over the past year, the correlation between XEG.TO and CIF.TO has dropped to 0.16 - well below their long-term average of 0.42, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XEG.TO
CIF.TO

Energy

100.0%
20.8%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

0.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

31.8%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

0.5%

Utilities

-

46.9%

Energy

XEG.TO
100.0%
CIF.TO
20.8%

Basic Materials

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO

-

Communication Services

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO

-

Financial Services

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO

-

Healthcare

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO

-

Industrials

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO
31.8%

Real Estate

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO

-

Technology

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO
0.5%

Utilities

XEG.TO

-

CIF.TO
46.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index ETF

iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF

Often compared with XEG.TO:
XEG.TO vs. XLEXEG.TO vs. XEQT.TOXEG.TO vs. CNQ.TOXEG.TO vs. HXE.TOXEG.TO vs. ZEO.TOXEG.TO vs. XDIV.TOXEG.TO vs. XCG.TO
Often compared with CIF.TO:
CIF.TO vs. VFV.TOCIF.TO vs. MLPP.LCIF.TO vs. ZQQ.TOCIF.TO vs. CWW.TOCIF.TO vs. VGTCIF.TO vs. XDIV.TOCIF.TO vs. ZGI.TO

Return for Risk

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XEG.TO
XEG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
XEG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
XEG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
CIF.TO
CIF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index ETF (XEG.TO) and iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.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.

XEG.TOCIF.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.11
2.33

+0.78

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.66
3.13

+0.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.43

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.36

3.72

+2.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.02

13.46

+5.56

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

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XEG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.11, which is higher than the CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XEG.TO and CIF.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

XEG.TOCIF.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.11

2.33

+0.78

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.04

1.28

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.36

0.78

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.54

-0.26

Drawdowns

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XEG.TO drawdown since its inception was -87.74%, which is greater than CIF.TO's maximum drawdown of -42.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XEG.TO and CIF.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XEG.TOCIF.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-87.74%

-42.37%

-45.37%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.12%

-9.50%

-1.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.67%

-20.40%

-5.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.42%

-20.40%

-8.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-79.66%

-42.37%

-37.29%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.00%

-0.76%

-3.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.19%

-5.66%

-23.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.71%

2.63%

+1.08%

Volatility

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index ETF (XEG.TO) has a higher volatility of 9.31% compared to iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) at 5.85%. This indicates that XEG.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CIF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XEG.TOCIF.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.31%

5.85%

+3.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.99%

12.44%

+6.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.76%

15.23%

+7.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.62%

14.56%

+14.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.41%

16.69%

+16.72%

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XEG.TO has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than CIF.TO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

XEG.TO vs. CIF.TO - Dividend Comparison

XEG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.65%, more than CIF.TO's 1.77% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CIF.TO
iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF		1.77%2.05%2.84%2.36%2.53%2.24%2.06%1.83%2.45%2.27%1.81%2.41%
XEG.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index ETF		2.65%3.63%3.46%4.26%3.31%1.64%2.96%2.70%2.25%1.41%1.40%3.58%

Frequently Asked Questions

XEG.TO and CIF.TO have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XEG.TO is cheaper at 0.61% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEG.TO is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CIF.TO.

XEG.TO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Energy Index, while CIF.TO tracks Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for XEG.TO and 0.72% for CIF.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XEG.TO and CIF.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