PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XLF vs. XBM.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XLF vs. XBM.TO

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) and XBM.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLF is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Financial Select Sector Index, while XBM.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Can Natural Resource NR CAD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLF returned 13.33%/yr vs 18.63%/yr for XBM.TO. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XLF charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for XBM.TO.

Performance

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XLF is traded in USD, while XBM.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the XBM.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLF achieves a -2.11% return, which is significantly lower than XBM.TO's 28.49% return. Over the past 10 years, XLF has underperformed XBM.TO with an annualized return of 13.33%, while XBM.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 18.63% annualized return.

XLF

1D
1.37%
1M
4.38%
YTD
-2.11%
6M
-2.09%
1Y
8.41%
3Y*
18.86%
5Y*
9.15%
10Y*
13.33%

XBM.TO

1D
2.55%
1M
-1.15%
YTD
28.49%
6M
36.69%
1Y
99.27%
3Y*
24.72%
5Y*
14.48%
10Y*
18.63%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF		-2.11%14.90%30.56%12.03%-10.59%34.80%-1.74%31.88%-13.06%22.00%
XBM.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF		28.49%57.90%-2.31%5.35%-2.55%28.01%34.73%14.67%-28.44%42.10%

Correlation

The correlation between XLF and XBM.TO is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.28

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

0.33

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

0.43

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

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2011

0.43

The correlation between XLF and XBM.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.28 (1 year) to 0.48 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XLF
XBM.TO

Financial Services

98.0%

-

Technology

1.8%

-

Industrials

0.2%
0.2%

Basic Materials

-

99.8%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

XLF
98.0%
XBM.TO

-

Technology

XLF
1.8%
XBM.TO

-

Industrials

XLF
0.2%
XBM.TO
0.2%

Basic Materials

XLF

-

XBM.TO
99.8%

Communication Services

XLF

-

XBM.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

XLF

-

XBM.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

XLF

-

XBM.TO

-

Energy

XLF

-

XBM.TO

-

Healthcare

XLF

-

XBM.TO

-

Real Estate

XLF

-

XBM.TO

-

Utilities

XLF

-

XBM.TO

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF

iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF

Often compared with XLF:
XLF vs. SPYXLF vs. VFHXLF vs. KBWBXLF vs. XLVXLF vs. KREXLF vs. KBEXLF vs. JPM
Often compared with XBM.TO:
XBM.TO vs. XMEXBM.TO vs. ZMT.TOXBM.TO vs. XEG.TOXBM.TO vs. XETM.TOXBM.TO vs. GDXXBM.TO vs. XMA.TOXBM.TO vs. VDE

Return for Risk

XLF vs. XBM.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XLF
XLF Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank
XBM.TO
XBM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

XLFXBM.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.42
2.61

-2.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.67
2.95

-2.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.40

-0.32

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.42

4.11

-3.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.08

14.92

-13.84

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLF Sharpe Ratio is 0.42, which is lower than the XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLF and XBM.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...

Drawdowns

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, which is greater than XBM.TO's maximum drawdown of -78.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and XBM.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XLFXBM.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.69%

-78.69%

-4.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.79%

-24.22%

+9.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.54%

-40.16%

+24.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.81%

-42.87%

+17.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.86%

-63.09%

+20.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.94%

-9.21%

+4.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.01%

-36.01%

+16.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.76%

6.65%

-0.89%

Volatility

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 4.23%, while iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) has a volatility of 17.01%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XBM.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XLFXBM.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.23%

17.01%

-12.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.26%

32.24%

-20.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.69%

38.07%

-23.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.66%

34.29%

-15.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.17%

33.66%

-11.49%

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than XBM.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

XLF vs. XBM.TO - Dividend Comparison

XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, more than XBM.TO's 0.65% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XBM.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF		0.65%0.86%1.25%2.09%4.78%3.05%1.81%3.73%3.38%1.65%2.41%5.75%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF		1.49%1.31%1.42%1.71%2.04%1.63%2.03%1.87%2.08%1.48%21.10%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

XLF and XBM.TO have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XBM.TO.

XLF is categorized as Financials Equities, while XBM.TO is Energy Equities. XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index, while XBM.TO tracks Morningstar Can Natural Resource NR CAD. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLF and 0.60% for XBM.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XLF and XBM.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