PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026
Documentation

XMI.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF) and QDX.TO (Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - XMI.TO tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility Index while QDX.TO tracks the Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMI.TO returned 8.34%/yr vs 11.18%/yr for QDX.TO. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMI.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for QDX.TO.

Performance

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (XMI.TO) and Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMI.TO achieves a 9.90% return, which is significantly lower than QDX.TO's 12.77% return.

XMI.TO

1D
1.23%
1M
3.55%
6M
7.91%
YTD
9.90%
1Y
14.17%
3Y*
15.24%
5Y*
8.34%
10Y*
6.30%
ALL TIME*
9.10%

QDX.TO

1D
0.60%
1M
0.77%
6M
8.60%
YTD
12.77%
1Y
22.22%
3Y*
18.09%
5Y*
11.18%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
8.76%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

QDX.TO

Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF
CA$158.94KCA$352.11KCA$709.93K

XMI.TO

iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF
CA$47.75KCA$79.69KCA$218.68K

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XMI.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF		9.90%19.69%13.51%9.32%-10.50%7.01%-2.02%9.84%0.65%
QDX.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF		12.77%25.29%12.93%13.65%-8.61%11.24%5.06%15.27%-8.78%

Correlation

The correlation between XMI.TO and QDX.TO is 0.66, 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

0.66

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

0.65

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

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2018

0.51

The correlation between XMI.TO and QDX.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (all time) to 0.66 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMI.TO
QDX.TO

Financial Services

19.4%
24.6%

Industrials

14.4%
19.0%

Consumer Defensive

12.1%
6.7%

Healthcare

11.6%
10.4%

Communication Services

8.9%
4.3%

Utilities

8.3%
3.7%

Energy

7.1%
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

5.0%
7.7%

Technology

4.3%
12.4%

Real Estate

2.9%
2.0%

Basic Materials

1.4%
5.8%

Financial Services

XMI.TO
19.4%
QDX.TO
24.6%

Industrials

XMI.TO
14.4%
QDX.TO
19.0%

Consumer Defensive

XMI.TO
12.1%
QDX.TO
6.7%

Healthcare

XMI.TO
11.6%
QDX.TO
10.4%

Communication Services

XMI.TO
8.9%
QDX.TO
4.3%

Utilities

XMI.TO
8.3%
QDX.TO
3.7%

Energy

XMI.TO
7.1%
QDX.TO
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XMI.TO
5.0%
QDX.TO
7.7%

Technology

XMI.TO
4.3%
QDX.TO
12.4%

Real Estate

XMI.TO
2.9%
QDX.TO
2.0%

Basic Materials

XMI.TO
1.4%
QDX.TO
5.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF

Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF

Often compared with XMI.TO:
XMI.TO vs. XMV.TOXMI.TO vs. ZLB.TOXMI.TO vs. XMU.TOXMI.TO vs. EFAVXMI.TO vs. XEF.TOXMI.TO vs. XMW.TOXMI.TO vs. XUU.TO
Often compared with QDX.TO:
QDX.TO vs. QDXH.TOQDX.TO vs. FCRI.TOQDX.TO vs. TILV.TOQDX.TO vs. QTIP.NEOQDX.TO vs. RIDH.TOQDX.TO vs. XMV.TOQDX.TO vs. ZXM.TO

Return for Risk

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMI.TO
XMI.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
XMI.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMI.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMI.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
XMI.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMI.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank
QDX.TO
QDX.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
QDX.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDX.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (XMI.TO) and Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.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.

XMI.TOQDX.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.37
1.51

-0.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.95
2.20

-0.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.28

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.33

2.05

+0.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.63

7.86

-1.23

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMI.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is comparable to the QDX.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMI.TO and QDX.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

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMI.TO drawdown since its inception was -23.08%, smaller than the maximum QDX.TO drawdown of -28.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMI.TO and QDX.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMI.TOQDX.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.08%

-28.08%

+5.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.12%

-10.88%

+4.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.97%

-14.25%

+6.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.18%

-23.55%

+2.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.08%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-2.53%

+2.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.02%

-4.49%

+0.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.14%

2.83%

-0.69%

Volatility

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (XMI.TO) is 2.80%, while Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (QDX.TO) has a volatility of 3.69%. This indicates that XMI.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QDX.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMI.TOQDX.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.80%

3.69%

-0.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.27%

12.66%

-4.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.37%

14.76%

-4.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.92%

14.07%

-4.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.36%

15.45%

-4.09%

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMI.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than QDX.TO's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMI.TO vs. QDX.TO - Dividend Comparison

XMI.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.60%, more than QDX.TO's 2.37% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QDX.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF		2.37%2.51%2.48%2.61%2.73%2.25%1.91%2.76%3.03%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XMI.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF		2.60%2.69%2.64%2.56%1.98%1.93%1.16%3.74%2.93%2.07%3.29%2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMI.TO and QDX.TO have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QDX.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QDX.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for XMI.TO.

XMI.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility Index, while QDX.TO tracks Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Mackenzie. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for XMI.TO and 0.17% for QDX.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMI.TO and QDX.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