XHC.TO vs. CIF.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XHC.TO (iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and CIF.TO (iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XHC.TO is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while CIF.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XHC.TO returned 6.87%/yr vs 12.99%/yr for CIF.TO. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XHC.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CIF.TO.

Performance

XHC.TO vs. CIF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XHC.TO) and iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XHC.TO achieves a -5.65% return, which is significantly lower than CIF.TO's 25.20% return. Over the past 10 years, XHC.TO has underperformed CIF.TO with an annualized return of 6.87%, while CIF.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 12.99% annualized return.

XHC.TO

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: 0.77%
• YTD: -5.65%
• 6M: -5.54%
• 1Y: 7.72%
• 3Y*: 2.70%
• 5Y*: 3.54%
• 10Y*: 6.87%

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)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XHC.TO iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	-5.65%	10.91%	1.22%	2.14%	-3.56%	21.32%	8.71%	22.47%	2.20%	16.84%
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 XHC.TO and CIF.TO is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.32
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2011	0.43

The correlation between XHC.TO and CIF.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.24 (1 year) to 0.43 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	XHC.TO	CIF.TO
Healthcare	97.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.5%
Energy	-	20.8%
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	31.8%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	0.5%
Utilities	-	46.9%

Return for Risk

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

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

XHC.TO

XHC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 17
XHC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
XHC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
XHC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 16
XHC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
XHC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 17

CIF.TO

CIF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 70
CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
CIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 71
CIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
CIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XHC.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.

	XHC.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.54	2.33	-1.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.91	3.13	-2.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.43	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.72	3.72	-3.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.76	13.46	-11.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current XHC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.54, which is lower than the CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XHC.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XHC.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54	2.33	-1.79
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26	1.28	-1.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.44	0.78	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.67	0.54	+0.14

Drawdowns

XHC.TO vs. CIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XHC.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.28%, smaller than the maximum CIF.TO drawdown of -42.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XHC.TO and CIF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XHC.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.28%	-42.37%	+15.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.79%	-9.50%	-1.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.81%	-20.40%	+1.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.81%	-20.40%	+1.59%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.28%	-42.37%	+15.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.76%	-0.76%	-9.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.85%	-5.66%	+0.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.39%	2.63%	+1.76%

Volatility

XHC.TO vs. CIF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XHC.TO) is 4.76%, while iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) has a volatility of 5.85%. This indicates that XHC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XHC.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.76%	5.85%	-1.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.21%	12.44%	-2.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.34%	15.23%	-0.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.87%	14.56%	-0.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.75%	16.69%	-0.94%

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

XHC.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than CIF.TO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

XHC.TO vs. CIF.TO - Dividend Comparison

XHC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, more than CIF.TO's 1.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
XHC.TO iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	1.98%	1.87%	4.42%	2.38%	0.84%	0.79%	0.96%	1.07%	1.68%	1.14%	1.63%	2.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XHC.TO and CIF.TO in my portfolio?

XHC.TO and CIF.TO have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XHC.TO or CIF.TO?

On fees, XHC.TO is cheaper at 0.66% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XHC.TO or CIF.TO?

XHC.TO is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CIF.TO.

What is the main difference between XHC.TO and CIF.TO?

XHC.TO is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while CIF.TO is Energy Equities. XHC.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while CIF.TO tracks Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for XHC.TO and 0.72% for CIF.TO.