XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

XML.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and FCIV.TO (Fidelity International Value ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - XML.TO tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index while FCIV.TO tracks the Fidelity Canada International Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XML.TO returned 9.44%/yr vs 16.25%/yr for FCIV.TO. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XML.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FCIV.TO.

Performance

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - 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 Fidelity International Value ETF (FCIV.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XML.TO achieves a 9.26% return, which is significantly lower than FCIV.TO's 18.56% return.

XML.TO

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 4.75%
• 6M: 8.26%
• YTD: 9.26%
• 1Y: 15.77%
• 3Y*: 14.42%
• 5Y*: 9.44%
• 10Y*: 7.49%
• ALL TIME*: 7.71%

FCIV.TO

• 1D: 0.75%
• 1M: 3.25%
• 6M: 11.79%
• YTD: 18.56%
• 1Y: 30.55%
• 3Y*: 21.67%
• 5Y*: 16.25%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.95%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FCIV.TO Fidelity International Value ETF	CA$1.29M	CA$1.38M	CA$2.09M
XML.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	CA$12.85K	CA$7.78K	CA$9.01K

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
XML.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	9.26%	17.56%	14.13%	11.69%	-6.94%	13.27%	2.75%
FCIV.TO Fidelity International Value ETF	18.56%	33.60%	6.89%	22.75%	-0.22%	14.15%	4.49%

Correlation

The correlation between XML.TO and FCIV.TO is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2020	0.34

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XML.TO	FCIV.TO
Financial Services	19.7%	31.7%
Industrials	15.7%	10.6%
Consumer Defensive	12.6%	10.2%
Healthcare	12.2%	3.1%
Communication Services	9.1%	1.3%
Utilities	9.0%	-
Energy	7.7%	11.1%
Consumer Cyclical	5.1%	8.2%
Technology	4.4%	6.8%
Real Estate	2.9%	8.3%
Basic Materials	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO — 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: 73
XML.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
XML.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
XML.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 84
XML.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
XML.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

FCIV.TO

FCIV.TO Risk / Return Rank: 87
FCIV.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FCIV.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FCIV.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FCIV.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FCIV.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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. FCIV.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 Fidelity International Value ETF (FCIV.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	FCIV.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	2.10	-0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	2.80	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.38	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	3.57	-1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.64	13.37	-5.73

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XML.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is comparable to the FCIV.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XML.TO and FCIV.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.

Drawdowns

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XML.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.62%, which is greater than FCIV.TO's maximum drawdown of -24.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XML.TO and FCIV.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XML.TO	FCIV.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.62%	-24.27%	-4.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.46%	-8.59%	+2.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.46%	-16.59%	+9.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-12.34%	-24.27%	+11.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.54%	+0.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.43%	-4.02%	+0.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.07%	2.29%	-0.22%

Volatility

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) is 2.68%, while Fidelity International Value ETF (FCIV.TO) has a volatility of 3.69%. This indicates that XML.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCIV.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XML.TO	FCIV.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.68%	3.69%	-1.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.79%	11.28%	-3.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.27%	14.65%	-5.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.81%	15.24%	-5.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.92%	15.48%	-3.56%

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XML.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than FCIV.TO's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

XML.TO vs. FCIV.TO - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FCIV.TO Fidelity International Value ETF	2.11%	2.09%	2.80%	3.64%	3.45%	2.97%	0.90%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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%	2.79%	1.91%	3.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XML.TO and FCIV.TO in my portfolio?

XML.TO and FCIV.TO have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XML.TO or FCIV.TO?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, XML.TO or FCIV.TO?

XML.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FCIV.TO.

What is the main difference between XML.TO and FCIV.TO?

XML.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while FCIV.TO tracks Fidelity Canada International Value Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for XML.TO and 0.45% for FCIV.TO.