XIN.TO vs. GBAL.TO
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XIN.TO) and iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO).
XIN.TO and GBAL.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. XIN.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI EAFE 100% Hedged to CAD Index. It was launched on Sep 6, 2001. GBAL.TO is an actively managed fund by iShares. It was launched on Sep 2, 2020.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: XIN.TO or GBAL.TO.
Key characteristics
| XIN.TO | GBAL.TO | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 11.64% | 16.19% |
| 1Y Return | 17.43% | 25.26% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 7.26% | 5.45% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.66 | 3.09 |
| Sortino Ratio | 2.24 | 4.74 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.30 | 1.68 |
| Calmar Ratio | 1.92 | 3.36 |
| Martin Ratio | 8.67 | 20.15 |
| Ulcer Index | 2.03% | 1.33% |
| Daily Std Dev | 10.63% | 8.61% |
| Max Drawdown | -58.56% | -18.92% |
| Current Drawdown | -2.87% | -1.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between XIN.TO and GBAL.TO is 0.73, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
XIN.TO vs. GBAL.TO - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, XIN.TO achieves a 11.64% return, which is significantly lower than GBAL.TO's 16.19% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
XIN.TO vs. GBAL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XIN.TO has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is higher than GBAL.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
XIN.TO vs. GBAL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XIN.TO) and iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.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.
Dividends
XIN.TO vs. GBAL.TO - Dividend Comparison
XIN.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, more than GBAL.TO's 2.19% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XIN.TO iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 2.44% | 2.51% | 2.18% | 2.65% | 1.81% | 2.58% | 2.85% | 2.16% | 2.41% | 2.32% | 2.83% | 2.17% |
GBAL.TO iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio | 2.19% | 2.40% | 1.87% | 1.44% | 0.96% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
XIN.TO vs. GBAL.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XIN.TO drawdown since its inception was -58.56%, which is greater than GBAL.TO's maximum drawdown of -18.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XIN.TO and GBAL.TO. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
XIN.TO vs. GBAL.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XIN.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.97% compared to iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO) at 1.81%. This indicates that XIN.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBAL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.