XML.TO vs. EVO.TO
XML.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and EVO.TO (Evovest Global Equity ETF) are both Global Equities funds. XML.TO is passively managed, while EVO.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, XML.TO returned 12.71% vs 2.29% for EVO.TO. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XML.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for EVO.TO.
Performance
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XML.TO achieves a 5.34% return, which is significantly lower than EVO.TO's 13.09% return.
XML.TO
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- 0.54%
- YTD
- 5.34%
- 6M
- 4.35%
- 1Y
- 12.71%
- 3Y*
- 13.24%
- 5Y*
- 9.08%
- 10Y*
- 7.47%
EVO.TO
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- 4.32%
- YTD
- 13.09%
- 6M
- 12.64%
- 1Y
- 2.29%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
XML.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 5.34% | 17.56% | 6.18% |
EVO.TO Evovest Global Equity ETF | 13.09% | 4.38% | 1.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between XML.TO and EVO.TO is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2024 | 0.32 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XML.TO
EVO.TO
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO - 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 Evovest Global Equity ETF (EVO.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.
| XML.TO | EVO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.06 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.08 | 0.12 | +1.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.61 | 0.25 | +6.36 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XML.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.62%, which is greater than EVO.TO's maximum drawdown of -19.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XML.TO and EVO.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XML.TO | EVO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.62% | -19.36% | -9.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.46% | -19.36% | +12.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.46% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.34% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.62% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.92% | -6.35% | +3.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.44% | -4.81% | +1.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.03% | 9.35% | -7.32% |
Volatility
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.83% compared to Evovest Global Equity ETF (EVO.TO) at 3.95%. This indicates that XML.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EVO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XML.TO | EVO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.83% | 3.95% | +0.88% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.87% | 10.53% | -2.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.19% | 20.97% | -11.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.85% | 19.83% | -9.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.95% | 19.83% | -7.88% |
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XML.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than EVO.TO's 1.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
XML.TO vs. EVO.TO - Dividend Comparison
XML.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.76%, more than EVO.TO's 0.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EVO.TO Evovest Global Equity ETF | 0.59% | 0.67% | 0.82% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XML.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 2.76% | 2.76% | 2.67% | 2.56% | 2.02% | 1.92% | 1.11% | 3.62% | 2.79% | 1.91% | 3.33% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XML.TO and EVO.TO have a correlation of 0.32, 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 1.15% for EVO.TO.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and National Bank Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for XML.TO and 1.15% for EVO.TO.
Find the right allocation for XML.TO and EVO.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