PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMH.TO (iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and XGRO.TO (iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio) are both exchange-traded funds - XMH.TO is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400® CAD Hedged Index, while XGRO.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by iShares. XMH.TO is passively managed, while XGRO.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMH.TO returned 9.19%/yr vs 10.17%/yr for XGRO.TO. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMH.TO charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XGRO.TO.

Performance

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMH.TO achieves a 13.31% return, which is significantly higher than XGRO.TO's 10.70% return. Over the past 10 years, XMH.TO has underperformed XGRO.TO with an annualized return of 9.19%, while XGRO.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 10.17% annualized return.

XMH.TO

1D
0.40%
1M
2.82%
YTD
13.31%
6M
12.73%
1Y
23.11%
3Y*
14.43%
5Y*
6.17%
10Y*
9.19%

XGRO.TO

1D
0.29%
1M
5.00%
YTD
10.70%
6M
8.71%
1Y
23.83%
3Y*
18.10%
5Y*
10.89%
10Y*
10.17%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMH.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		13.31%5.45%12.05%15.06%-14.93%21.83%10.06%24.77%-13.79%15.70%
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		10.70%15.59%19.53%15.01%-11.08%14.29%11.51%17.97%-6.73%11.61%

Correlation

The correlation between XMH.TO and XGRO.TO is 0.72, 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

0.72

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

0.75

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

0.78

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

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 12, 2015

0.69

The correlation between XMH.TO and XGRO.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMH.TO
XGRO.TO

Industrials

25.6%
7.3%

Technology

17.1%
25.8%

Financial Services

13.8%
20.3%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
6.3%

Healthcare

8.9%
5.1%

Real Estate

7.5%
0.4%

Energy

5.2%
7.2%

Basic Materials

5.0%
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
3.8%

Utilities

3.0%
1.5%

Communication Services

1.0%
6.8%

Industrials

XMH.TO
25.6%
XGRO.TO
7.3%

Technology

XMH.TO
17.1%
XGRO.TO
25.8%

Financial Services

XMH.TO
13.8%
XGRO.TO
20.3%

Consumer Cyclical

XMH.TO
9.7%
XGRO.TO
6.3%

Healthcare

XMH.TO
8.9%
XGRO.TO
5.1%

Real Estate

XMH.TO
7.5%
XGRO.TO
0.4%

Energy

XMH.TO
5.2%
XGRO.TO
7.2%

Basic Materials

XMH.TO
5.0%
XGRO.TO
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

XMH.TO
4.1%
XGRO.TO
3.8%

Utilities

XMH.TO
3.0%
XGRO.TO
1.5%

Communication Services

XMH.TO
1.0%
XGRO.TO
6.8%

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 U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio

Often compared with XMH.TO:
XMH.TO vs. XMHQXMH.TO vs. VOTXMH.TO vs. VFV.TOXMH.TO vs. XEF.TOXMH.TO vs. USMVXMH.TO vs. XMD.TOXMH.TO vs. XSU.TO
Often compared with XGRO.TO:
XGRO.TO vs. XEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. VGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. VEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. XCG.TOXGRO.TO vs. TGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. XAW.TO

Return for Risk

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMH.TO
XMH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
XMH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO
XGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.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.

XMH.TOXGRO.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.46
2.22

-0.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.18
3.13

-0.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.42

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.51

3.36

-0.85

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.15

14.92

-5.77

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

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMH.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMH.TO and XGRO.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XMH.TOXGRO.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.46

2.22

-0.76

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.32

0.99

-0.68

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

0.83

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.36

+0.06

Drawdowns

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMH.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.82%, smaller than the maximum XGRO.TO drawdown of -47.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMH.TO and XGRO.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMH.TOXGRO.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.82%

-47.97%

+3.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.24%

-7.12%

-2.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.81%

-12.47%

-12.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.86%

-18.40%

-7.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.82%

-25.85%

-18.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.03%

-8.49%

+1.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.53%

1.60%

+0.93%

Volatility

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.98% compared to iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) at 3.40%. This indicates that XMH.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XGRO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMH.TOXGRO.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.98%

3.40%

+0.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.57%

9.20%

+2.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.90%

10.78%

+5.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.65%

11.05%

+8.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.95%

12.26%

+8.69%

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMH.TO has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than XGRO.TO's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XMH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

XMH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.97%, less than XGRO.TO's 1.75% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		1.75%1.92%1.98%2.22%1.86%1.66%1.94%2.21%7.42%2.04%2.65%2.15%
XMH.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.97%1.10%1.03%1.16%1.30%0.91%1.02%1.35%1.39%0.88%1.52%0.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMH.TO and XGRO.TO have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMH.TO is cheaper at 0.16% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMH.TO is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

XMH.TO is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while XGRO.TO is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XMH.TO and 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMH.TO and XGRO.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