PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) and iShares Floating Rate Index ETF (XFR.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XGRO.TO achieves a 10.70% return, which is significantly higher than XFR.TO's 1.02% return. Over the past 10 years, XGRO.TO has outperformed XFR.TO with an annualized return of 10.17%, while XFR.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 2.25% annualized return.


XGRO.TO

1D
0.29%
1M
5.00%
YTD
10.70%
6M
8.71%
1Y
23.83%
3Y*
18.10%
5Y*
10.89%
10Y*
10.17%

XFR.TO

1D
0.02%
1M
0.18%
YTD
1.02%
6M
1.35%
1Y
2.94%
3Y*
3.99%
5Y*
3.21%
10Y*
2.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio
10.70%15.59%19.53%15.01%-11.08%14.29%11.51%17.97%-6.73%11.61%
XFR.TO
iShares Floating Rate Index ETF
1.02%3.33%4.57%5.29%1.82%0.15%0.98%2.23%1.16%1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between XGRO.TO and XFR.TO is 0.05, 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

0.05

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

0.05

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

0.05

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

0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2011

0.05

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

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XGRO.TO
XGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

XFR.TO
XFR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
XFR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XFR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
XFR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
XFR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
XFR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
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.

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) and iShares Floating Rate Index ETF (XFR.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.


XGRO.TOXFR.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.96

-0.53

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.36

29.53

-26.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.92

87.75

-72.83

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is lower than the XFR.TO Sharpe Ratio of 4.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XGRO.TO and XFR.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


XGRO.TOXFR.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.22

4.09

-1.87

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.99

3.93

-2.94

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

1.22

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

1.19

-0.83

Drawdowns

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XGRO.TO drawdown since its inception was -47.97%, which is greater than XFR.TO's maximum drawdown of -4.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGRO.TO and XFR.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XGRO.TOXFR.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.97%

-4.12%

-43.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.12%

-0.10%

-7.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.47%

-0.30%

-12.17%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.40%

-0.30%

-18.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.85%

-4.12%

-21.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.02%

+0.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.49%

-0.06%

-8.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.60%

0.03%

+1.57%

Volatility

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.40% compared to iShares Floating Rate Index ETF (XFR.TO) at 0.18%. This indicates that XGRO.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XFR.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XGRO.TOXFR.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.40%

0.18%

+3.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.20%

0.47%

+8.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.78%

0.72%

+10.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.05%

0.82%

+10.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.26%

1.85%

+10.41%

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XGRO.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than XFR.TO's 0.14% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XGRO.TO vs. XFR.TO - Dividend Comparison

XGRO.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, less than XFR.TO's 2.77% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XFR.TO
iShares Floating Rate Index ETF
2.77%3.23%4.93%4.91%1.85%0.30%1.07%1.96%1.60%0.95%0.77%0.94%
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio
1.75%1.92%1.98%2.22%1.86%1.66%1.94%2.21%7.42%2.04%2.65%2.15%

Frequently Asked Questions


XGRO.TO and XFR.TO have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XFR.TO is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XFR.TO is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

XGRO.TO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while XFR.TO is Canadian Government Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XGRO.TO and 0.14% for XFR.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XGRO.TO and XFR.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