PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XIC.TO vs. XGRO.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XIC.TO vs. XGRO.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XIC.TO (iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF) and XGRO.TO (iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio) are both exchange-traded funds - XIC.TO is a Canada Equities fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index, while XGRO.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by iShares. XIC.TO is passively managed, while XGRO.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, XIC.TO returned 12.48%/yr vs 10.20%/yr for XGRO.TO. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XIC.TO charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XGRO.TO.

Performance

XIC.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF (XIC.TO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XIC.TO having a 10.75% return and XGRO.TO slightly lower at 10.38%. Over the past 10 years, XIC.TO has outperformed XGRO.TO with an annualized return of 12.48%, while XGRO.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 10.20% annualized return.

XIC.TO

1D
-1.05%
1M
3.59%
YTD
10.75%
6M
12.90%
1Y
34.79%
3Y*
23.62%
5Y*
14.60%
10Y*
12.48%

XGRO.TO

1D
-0.18%
1M
5.42%
YTD
10.38%
6M
8.74%
1Y
23.44%
3Y*
17.87%
5Y*
10.83%
10Y*
10.20%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XIC.TO
iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF		10.75%31.51%21.48%11.73%-5.82%23.42%5.61%22.76%-8.72%8.99%
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		10.38%15.59%19.53%15.01%-11.08%14.29%11.51%17.97%-6.73%11.61%

Correlation

The correlation between XIC.TO and XGRO.TO is 0.75, 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

0.75

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

0.80

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

0.81

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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2007

0.64

The correlation between XIC.TO and XGRO.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (all time) to 0.81 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XIC.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XIC.TO
XGRO.TO

Financial Services

34.0%
20.3%

Energy

18.1%
7.2%

Basic Materials

17.2%
5.6%

Industrials

10.0%
7.3%

Technology

6.7%
25.8%

Consumer Cyclical

3.7%
6.3%

Utilities

2.9%
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
3.8%

Communication Services

1.8%
6.8%

Real Estate

1.5%
0.4%

Healthcare

0.1%
5.1%

Financial Services

XIC.TO
34.0%
XGRO.TO
20.3%

Energy

XIC.TO
18.1%
XGRO.TO
7.2%

Basic Materials

XIC.TO
17.2%
XGRO.TO
5.6%

Industrials

XIC.TO
10.0%
XGRO.TO
7.3%

Technology

XIC.TO
6.7%
XGRO.TO
25.8%

Consumer Cyclical

XIC.TO
3.7%
XGRO.TO
6.3%

Utilities

XIC.TO
2.9%
XGRO.TO
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

XIC.TO
2.9%
XGRO.TO
3.8%

Communication Services

XIC.TO
1.8%
XGRO.TO
6.8%

Real Estate

XIC.TO
1.5%
XGRO.TO
0.4%

Healthcare

XIC.TO
0.1%
XGRO.TO
5.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF

iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio

Often compared with XIC.TO:
XIC.TO vs. XIU.TOXIC.TO vs. VDY.TOXIC.TO vs. ZCN.TOXIC.TO vs. VCE.TOXIC.TO vs. XEF.TOXIC.TO vs. VEQT.TOXIC.TO vs. VO
Often compared with XGRO.TO:
XGRO.TO vs. XEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. VGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. VEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. XCG.TOXGRO.TO vs. TGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. XAW.TO

Return for Risk

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XIC.TO
XIC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
XIC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XIC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
XIC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XIC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
XIC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO
XGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF (XIC.TO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.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.

XIC.TOXGRO.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.76
2.18

+0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.57
3.09

+0.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.41

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.76

3.30

+0.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.44

14.67

+2.77

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

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

The current XIC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is comparable to the XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XIC.TO and XGRO.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

XIC.TOXGRO.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.76

2.18

+0.57

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.12

0.99

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.84

0.84

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.35

+0.19

Drawdowns

XIC.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XIC.TO drawdown since its inception was -48.21%, roughly equal to the maximum XGRO.TO drawdown of -47.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XIC.TO and XGRO.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XIC.TOXGRO.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.21%

-47.97%

-0.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.29%

-7.12%

-2.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.27%

-12.47%

+0.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.24%

-18.40%

+2.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.21%

-25.85%

-11.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.05%

-0.18%

-0.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.04%

-8.49%

+1.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.00%

1.60%

+0.40%

Volatility

XIC.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF (XIC.TO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) have volatilities of 3.48% and 3.43%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XIC.TOXGRO.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.48%

3.43%

+0.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.33%

9.19%

+1.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.67%

10.78%

+1.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.13%

11.05%

+2.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.96%

12.26%

+2.70%

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

XIC.TO has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than XGRO.TO's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XIC.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

XIC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.02%, more than XGRO.TO's 1.76% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		1.76%1.92%1.98%2.22%1.86%1.66%1.94%2.21%7.42%2.04%2.65%2.15%
XIC.TO
iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF		2.02%2.23%2.64%2.95%3.10%2.44%3.03%3.01%3.19%2.49%2.72%3.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

XIC.TO and XGRO.TO have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XIC.TO is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XIC.TO is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

XIC.TO is categorized as Canada Equities, while XGRO.TO is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for XIC.TO and 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XIC.TO and XGRO.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