PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XMA.TO vs. XLB

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

XMA.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF) and XLB (Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both Materials funds - XMA.TO tracks the S&P/TSX Capped Materials TR while XLB tracks the Materials Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMA.TO returned 13.48%/yr vs 11.48%/yr for XLB. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMA.TO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for XLB.

Performance

XMA.TO vs. XLB - 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 Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XMA.TO is traded in CAD, while XLB is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XLB 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 1.98% return, which is significantly lower than XLB's 17.92% return. Over the past 10 years, XMA.TO has outperformed XLB with an annualized return of 13.48%, while XLB has yielded a comparatively lower 11.48% annualized return.

XMA.TO

1D
3.03%
1M
-10.24%
YTD
1.98%
6M
3.38%
1Y
53.64%
3Y*
33.28%
5Y*
18.78%
10Y*
13.48%

XLB

1D
2.06%
1M
5.62%
YTD
17.92%
6M
18.35%
1Y
25.14%
3Y*
12.54%
5Y*
9.12%
10Y*
11.48%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMA.TO vs. XLB - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMA.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF		1.98%99.21%20.72%-2.04%1.35%3.32%19.73%24.64%-10.44%7.12%
XLB
Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF		17.92%4.92%8.63%9.78%-6.74%27.37%17.60%19.01%-7.72%15.62%

Correlation

The correlation between XMA.TO and XLB is 0.52, 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

0.52

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

0.47

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

0.49

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

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 12, 2006

0.44

The correlation between XMA.TO and XLB shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (10 years) to 0.52 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMA.TO vs. XLB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMA.TO
XLB

Basic Materials

98.1%
87.3%

Consumer Cyclical

1.6%
12.7%

Industrials

0.0%
1.5%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Basic Materials

XMA.TO
98.1%
XLB
87.3%

Consumer Cyclical

XMA.TO
1.6%
XLB
12.7%

Industrials

XMA.TO
0.0%
XLB
1.5%

Communication Services

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

Consumer Defensive

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

Energy

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

Financial Services

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

Healthcare

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

Real Estate

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

Technology

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

Utilities

XMA.TO

-

XLB

-

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

Materials Select Sector SPDR 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 XLB:
XLB vs. REMXXLB vs. VAWXLB vs. XLEXLB vs. SPYXLB vs. FMATXLB vs. XLYXLB vs. XLK

Return for Risk

XMA.TO vs. XLB — 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: 4444
Overall Rank
XMA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank
XLB
XLB Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
XLB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLB Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
XLB Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLB Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
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. XLB - 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 Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB). 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.

XMA.TOXLBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.46
1.31

+0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.83
1.93

-0.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.22

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.97

1.98

-0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.39

6.61

-1.22

XMA.TO vs. XLB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the XLB Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMA.TO and XLB, 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

XMA.TO vs. XLB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMA.TO drawdown since its inception was -64.42%, which is greater than XLB's maximum drawdown of -48.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMA.TO and XLB.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMA.TOXLBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.42%

-48.46%

-15.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.51%

-11.69%

-16.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.51%

-20.70%

-7.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.06%

-20.70%

-12.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.06%

-31.09%

-1.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-23.00%

0.00%

-23.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-27.07%

-8.13%

-18.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.41%

3.50%

+6.91%

Volatility

XMA.TO vs. XLB - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF (XMA.TO) has a higher volatility of 15.41% compared to Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) at 7.21%. This indicates that XMA.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMA.TOXLBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.41%

7.21%

+8.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.63%

13.80%

+18.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

38.59%

17.75%

+20.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.96%

19.83%

+8.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.78%

21.60%

+5.18%

XMA.TO vs. XLB - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMA.TO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XLB's 0.13% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMA.TO vs. XLB - Dividend Comparison

XMA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than XLB's 1.68% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XLB
Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF		1.68%1.92%1.92%2.00%2.26%1.62%1.72%1.98%2.20%1.66%1.95%2.24%
XMA.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF		0.39%0.41%0.83%1.26%1.24%0.87%0.63%0.64%0.75%0.47%0.82%1.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMA.TO and XLB have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XLB is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLB is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XMA.TO.

XMA.TO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Materials TR, while XLB tracks Materials Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for XMA.TO and 0.13% for XLB.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMA.TO and XLB

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