XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XETM.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF) and MNY.TO (Purpose Cash Management Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - XETM.TO is a Materials fund tracking the S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index, while MNY.TO is a Money Market fund actively managed by Purpose Investments. XETM.TO is passively managed, while MNY.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, XETM.TO returned 132.04% vs 2.59% for MNY.TO. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. XETM.TO charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for MNY.TO.

Performance

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF (XETM.TO) and Purpose Cash Management Fund (MNY.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XETM.TO achieves a 27.20% return, which is significantly higher than MNY.TO's 0.95% return.

XETM.TO

• 1D: -4.12%
• 1M: 14.61%
• YTD: 27.20%
• 6M: 37.88%
• 1Y: 132.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MNY.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.19%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 6M: 1.22%
• 1Y: 2.59%
• 3Y*: 3.91%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XETM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF	27.20%	74.97%	5.16%	-2.24%
MNY.TO Purpose Cash Management Fund	0.95%	3.03%	4.69%	1.67%

Correlation

The correlation between XETM.TO and MNY.TO is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2023	-0.02

Return for Risk

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

XETM.TO

XETM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 87
XETM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
XETM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
XETM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 87
XETM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
XETM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 86

MNY.TO

MNY.TO Risk / Return Rank: 100
MNY.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MNY.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
MNY.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 100
MNY.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MNY.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF (XETM.TO) and Purpose Cash Management Fund (MNY.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.

	XETM.TO	MNY.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.35	16.08	-12.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.62	52.31	-48.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	22.32	-20.78
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.29	65.02	-59.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.31	605.87	-587.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XETM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.35, which is lower than the MNY.TO Sharpe Ratio of 16.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XETM.TO and MNY.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XETM.TO	MNY.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.35	16.08	-12.73
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.01	11.02	-10.01

Drawdowns

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XETM.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, which is greater than MNY.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XETM.TO and MNY.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XETM.TO	MNY.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.71%	-0.24%	-33.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.13%	-0.04%	-25.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.12%	0.00%	-4.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.19%	-0.00%	-8.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.24%	0.00%	+7.24%

Volatility

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF (XETM.TO) has a higher volatility of 13.89% compared to Purpose Cash Management Fund (MNY.TO) at 0.03%. This indicates that XETM.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MNY.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XETM.TO	MNY.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.89%	0.03%	+13.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.22%	0.12%	+31.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.67%	0.16%	+39.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.24%	0.37%	+34.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.24%	0.37%	+34.87%

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XETM.TO has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than MNY.TO's 0.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

XETM.TO vs. MNY.TO - Dividend Comparison

XETM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, less than MNY.TO's 2.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
MNY.TO Purpose Cash Management Fund	2.56%	2.93%	4.71%	4.85%	1.47%
XETM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF	0.52%	0.66%	0.69%	0.48%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XETM.TO and MNY.TO in my portfolio?

XETM.TO and MNY.TO have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XETM.TO or MNY.TO?

On fees, MNY.TO is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XETM.TO or MNY.TO?

MNY.TO is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for XETM.TO.

What is the main difference between XETM.TO and MNY.TO?

XETM.TO is categorized as Materials, while MNY.TO is Money Market. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Purpose Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for XETM.TO and 0.22% for MNY.TO.