XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO
XIN.TO (iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and CMGG.TO (CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund) are both Global Equities funds. XIN.TO is passively managed, while CMGG.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XIN.TO returned 15.09%/yr vs 20.56%/yr for CMGG.TO. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XIN.TO charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for CMGG.TO.
Performance
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XIN.TO achieves a 9.11% return, which is significantly lower than CMGG.TO's 21.24% return.
XIN.TO
- 1D
- -0.52%
- 1M
- 4.48%
- YTD
- 9.11%
- 6M
- 10.87%
- 1Y
- 21.23%
- 3Y*
- 16.54%
- 5Y*
- 15.09%
- 10Y*
- 12.75%
CMGG.TO
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 10.96%
- YTD
- 21.24%
- 6M
- 21.36%
- 1Y
- 38.88%
- 3Y*
- 35.34%
- 5Y*
- 20.56%
- 10Y*
- —
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XIN.TO iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 9.11% | 20.30% | 14.27% | 19.36% | 1.59% | 22.00% |
CMGG.TO CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund | 21.24% | 21.00% | 52.95% | 24.21% | -21.16% | 11.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between XIN.TO and CMGG.TO is 0.65, 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 | 0.65 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.49 |
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 | 0.40 |
Over the past year, XIN.TO and CMGG.TO have become more correlated (0.65) than their long-term average of 0.40, 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
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XIN.TO
CMGG.TO
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XIN.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.
| XIN.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.70 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.77 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.40 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.19 | 3.85 | -1.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.95 | 10.77 | -1.82 |
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
| XIN.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.66 | 2.36 | -0.70 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.03 | 1.14 | -0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.78 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 0.98 | -0.59 |
Drawdowns
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XIN.TO drawdown since its inception was -58.14%, 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 XIN.TO and CMGG.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XIN.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.14% | -29.00% | -29.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.72% | -10.15% | +0.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.23% | -22.85% | +8.62% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.40% | -29.00% | +13.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.72% | 0.00% | -0.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.36% | -8.91% | -3.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.38% | 3.62% | -1.24% |
Volatility
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XIN.TO) is 3.99%, while CI Munro Global Growth Equity Fund (CMGG.TO) has a volatility of 6.68%. This indicates that XIN.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
| XIN.TO | CMGG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.99% | 6.68% | -2.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.68% | 12.94% | -2.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.83% | 16.53% | -3.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.72% | 18.22% | -3.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.44% | 18.49% | -2.05% |
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XIN.TO has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is lower than CMGG.TO's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
XIN.TO vs. CMGG.TO - Dividend Comparison
XIN.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.66%, 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% |
XIN.TO iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 2.66% | 2.90% | 2.66% | 2.60% | 2.27% | 2.98% | 2.15% | 3.06% | 3.43% | 2.60% | 2.90% | 2.80% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XIN.TO and CMGG.TO have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XIN.TO is cheaper at 0.52% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XIN.TO is cheaper with a 0.52% 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: 0.52% for XIN.TO and 0.90% for CMGG.TO.
Find the right allocation for XIN.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