PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XML.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and CIE.NEO (iShares International Fundamental Common Class) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - XML.TO tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index while CIE.NEO tracks the FTSE RAFI Developed ex US 1000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XML.TO returned 7.35%/yr vs 11.97%/yr for CIE.NEO. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XML.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.73%/yr for CIE.NEO.

Performance

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) and iShares International Fundamental Common Class (CIE.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XML.TO achieves a 3.89% return, which is significantly lower than CIE.NEO's 18.32% return. Over the past 10 years, XML.TO has underperformed CIE.NEO with an annualized return of 7.35%, while CIE.NEO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.97% annualized return.

XML.TO

1D
-0.12%
1M
-0.03%
YTD
3.89%
6M
5.30%
1Y
9.96%
3Y*
13.01%
5Y*
9.34%
10Y*
7.35%

CIE.NEO

1D
0.42%
1M
6.88%
YTD
18.32%
6M
20.08%
1Y
40.12%
3Y*
24.89%
5Y*
15.60%
10Y*
11.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XML.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		3.89%17.56%14.13%11.69%-6.94%13.27%-5.87%16.26%-3.28%15.15%
CIE.NEO
iShares International Fundamental Common Class		18.32%34.92%12.83%15.59%-2.83%14.42%1.33%11.29%-8.19%16.74%

Correlation

The correlation between XML.TO and CIE.NEO is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.35

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

0.33

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

0.35

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

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2016

0.43

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 (CAD-Hedged)

iShares International Fundamental Common Class

Often compared with XML.TO:
XML.TO vs. XIN.TOXML.TO vs. XMI.TOXML.TO vs. XMU.TOXML.TO vs. HXQ.TOXML.TO vs. XSP.TOXML.TO vs. XEQT.TOXML.TO vs. XMW.TO
Often compared with CIE.NEO:
CIE.NEO vs. PXFCIE.NEO vs. VGG.TOCIE.NEO vs. SPYCIE.NEO vs. DFIVCIE.NEO vs. FCCM.NEOCIE.NEO vs. XMW.TOCIE.NEO vs. XEQT.TO

Return for Risk

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XML.TO
XML.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
XML.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XML.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
XML.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
XML.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
XML.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO
CIE.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
CIE.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIE.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) and iShares International Fundamental Common Class (CIE.NEO). 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.

XML.TOCIE.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.15
2.89

-1.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.63
3.95

-2.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.55

-0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.00

3.63

-1.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.42

15.02

-9.60

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

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XML.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is lower than the CIE.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XML.TO and CIE.NEO, 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

XML.TOCIE.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.15

2.89

-1.74

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.97

1.13

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.66

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.62

0.44

+0.17

Drawdowns

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XML.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.62%, smaller than the maximum CIE.NEO drawdown of -40.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XML.TO and CIE.NEO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XML.TOCIE.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.62%

-40.08%

+11.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.88%

-11.10%

+6.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.46%

-15.44%

+7.98%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.34%

-20.55%

+8.21%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.62%

-40.08%

+11.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.26%

0.00%

-4.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.41%

-7.13%

+3.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.80%

2.68%

-0.88%

Volatility

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) is 2.60%, while iShares International Fundamental Common Class (CIE.NEO) has a volatility of 4.82%. This indicates that XML.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIE.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XML.TOCIE.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.60%

4.82%

-2.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.48%

11.56%

-5.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.50%

13.94%

-5.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.70%

13.85%

-4.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.09%

18.18%

-6.09%

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XML.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CIE.NEO's 0.73% expense ratio.

Dividends

XML.TO vs. CIE.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XML.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.66%, more than CIE.NEO's 2.11% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CIE.NEO
iShares International Fundamental Common Class		2.11%2.53%2.82%3.08%3.32%2.89%2.15%3.63%3.12%2.67%2.80%2.44%
XML.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.66%2.76%2.67%2.56%2.02%1.92%1.11%3.62%2.77%1.92%3.34%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XML.TO and CIE.NEO have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XML.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XML.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CIE.NEO.

XML.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while CIE.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Developed ex US 1000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for XML.TO and 0.73% for CIE.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XML.TO and CIE.NEO

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