XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO
XFH.TO (iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and CMGG.TO (CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund) are both Global Equities funds. XFH.TO is passively managed, while CMGG.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XFH.TO returned 10.31%/yr vs 20.41%/yr for CMGG.TO. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XFH.TO charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for CMGG.TO.
Performance
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XFH.TO achieves a 9.98% return, which is significantly lower than CMGG.TO's 20.49% return.
XFH.TO
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- 3.65%
- YTD
- 9.98%
- 6M
- 11.71%
- 1Y
- 23.32%
- 3Y*
- 16.60%
- 5Y*
- 10.31%
- 10Y*
- 10.20%
CMGG.TO
- 1D
- -0.62%
- 1M
- 7.39%
- YTD
- 20.49%
- 6M
- 20.10%
- 1Y
- 37.47%
- 3Y*
- 34.84%
- 5Y*
- 20.41%
- 10Y*
- —
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XFH.TO iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 9.98% | 21.68% | 11.68% | 18.28% | -6.60% | 9.22% |
CMGG.TO CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund | 20.49% | 21.00% | 52.95% | 24.21% | -21.16% | 11.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between XFH.TO and CMGG.TO is 0.63, 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 | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 13, 2021 | 0.39 |
Over the past year, XFH.TO and CMGG.TO have become more correlated (0.63) than their long-term average of 0.39, meaning their price movements have been converging.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XFH.TO
CMGG.TO
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XFH.TO) and CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.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.
| XFH.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.39 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.43 | 3.71 | -1.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.02 | 10.38 | -0.36 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XFH.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.95 | 2.28 | -0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 | 1.13 | -0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.63 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.51 | 0.97 | -0.46 |
Drawdowns
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XFH.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.85%, which is greater than CMGG.TO's maximum drawdown of -29.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XFH.TO and CMGG.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XFH.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.85% | -29.00% | -4.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.63% | -10.15% | +0.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.14% | -22.85% | +8.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.59% | -29.00% | +8.41% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.85% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.60% | -0.62% | +0.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.61% | -8.90% | +3.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.33% | 3.62% | -1.29% |
Volatility
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XFH.TO) is 3.93%, while CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.TO) has a volatility of 6.37%. This indicates that XFH.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMGG.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XFH.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.93% | 6.37% | -2.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.87% | 12.96% | -3.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.01% | 16.54% | -4.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.03% | 18.22% | -4.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.16% | 18.48% | -2.32% |
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XFH.TO has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than CMGG.TO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
XFH.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Dividend Comparison
XFH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, while CMGG.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMGG.TO CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XFH.TO iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 1.96% | 2.16% | 2.47% | 2.91% | 2.91% | 2.29% | 1.73% | 2.43% | 2.66% | 2.11% | 2.03% | 2.45% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XFH.TO and CMGG.TO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XFH.TO is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XFH.TO is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CMGG.TO.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and CI Global Asset Management. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for XFH.TO and 0.90% for CMGG.TO.
Find the right allocation for XFH.TO and CMGG.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