PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMA.TO vs. VOO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMA.TO vs. VOO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMA.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF) and VOO (Vanguard S&P 500 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMA.TO is a Materials fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Materials TR, while VOO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMA.TO returned 14.00%/yr vs 16.44%/yr for VOO. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMA.TO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VOO.

Performance

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF (XMA.TO) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMA.TO achieves a 7.60% return, which is significantly lower than VOO's 12.66% return. Over the past 10 years, XMA.TO has underperformed VOO with an annualized return of 14.00%, while VOO has yielded a comparatively higher 16.44% annualized return.

XMA.TO

1D
-3.13%
1M
5.70%
YTD
7.60%
6M
12.34%
1Y
64.71%
3Y*
35.49%
5Y*
20.09%
10Y*
14.00%

VOO

1D
0.00%
1M
7.45%
YTD
12.66%
6M
10.84%
1Y
30.08%
3Y*
23.99%
5Y*
17.22%
10Y*
16.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMA.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF		7.60%99.21%20.72%-2.04%1.35%3.31%19.73%24.63%-10.46%7.07%
VOO
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF		12.32%12.42%35.71%23.54%-12.34%27.63%16.32%24.91%3.60%14.02%

Correlation

The correlation between XMA.TO and VOO is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.22

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

0.20

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

0.19

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

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2010

0.16

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMA.TO
VOO

Basic Materials

98.4%
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

1.6%
10.2%

Industrials

0.0%
8.3%

Communication Services

-

11.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.9%

Energy

-

3.5%

Financial Services

-

11.6%

Healthcare

-

8.5%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Technology

-

35.7%

Utilities

-

2.4%

Basic Materials

XMA.TO
98.4%
VOO
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

XMA.TO
1.6%
VOO
10.2%

Industrials

XMA.TO
0.0%
VOO
8.3%

Communication Services

XMA.TO

-

VOO
11.3%

Consumer Defensive

XMA.TO

-

VOO
4.9%

Energy

XMA.TO

-

VOO
3.5%

Financial Services

XMA.TO

-

VOO
11.6%

Healthcare

XMA.TO

-

VOO
8.5%

Real Estate

XMA.TO

-

VOO
1.9%

Technology

XMA.TO

-

VOO
35.7%

Utilities

XMA.TO

-

VOO
2.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF

Vanguard S&P 500 ETF

Often compared with XMA.TO:
XMA.TO vs. XGD.TOXMA.TO vs. XETM.TOXMA.TO vs. XIC.TOXMA.TO vs. ZUT.TOXMA.TO vs. XIT.TOXMA.TO vs. XEQT.TOXMA.TO vs. XBM.TO
Often compared with VOO:
VOO vs. VTIVOO vs. QQQVOO vs. SCHDVOO vs. VTVOO vs. SPYVOO vs. FXAIXVOO vs. IVV

Return for Risk

XMA.TO vs. VOO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMA.TO
XMA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
XMA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank
VOO
VOO Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
VOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
VOO Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
VOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
VOO 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.

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF (XMA.TO) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). 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.

XMA.TOVOODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.75
2.60

-0.85

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.11
3.49

-1.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.50

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.41

3.51

-1.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.76

13.34

-6.58

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

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is lower than the VOO Sharpe Ratio of 2.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMA.TO and VOO, 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

XMA.TOVOODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

2.60

-0.85

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.73

1.16

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

1.01

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

1.15

-0.87

Drawdowns

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMA.TO drawdown since its inception was -64.13%, which is greater than VOO's maximum drawdown of -27.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMA.TO and VOO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMA.TOVOODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.13%

-27.65%

-36.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-26.96%

-8.62%

-18.34%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.96%

-18.93%

-8.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.06%

-22.08%

-10.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.06%

-27.65%

-5.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.76%

0.00%

-18.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.31%

-3.24%

-23.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.60%

2.26%

+7.34%

Volatility

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF (XMA.TO) has a higher volatility of 13.42% compared to Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) at 2.60%. This indicates that XMA.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMA.TOVOODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.42%

2.60%

+10.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

30.86%

8.79%

+22.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

37.08%

11.64%

+25.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.55%

14.91%

+12.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.56%

16.28%

+10.28%

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMA.TO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than VOO's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMA.TO vs. VOO - Dividend Comparison

XMA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than VOO's 1.03% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
VOO
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF		1.03%1.13%1.24%1.46%1.69%1.25%1.54%1.88%2.06%1.78%2.02%2.10%
XMA.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF		0.37%0.41%0.83%1.26%1.24%0.87%0.63%0.62%0.72%0.42%0.82%1.90%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMA.TO and VOO have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, VOO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

VOO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XMA.TO.

XMA.TO is categorized as Materials, while VOO is S&P 500. XMA.TO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Materials TR, while VOO tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for XMA.TO and 0.03% for VOO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMA.TO and VOO

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