PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XML.TO vs. QDXH.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026
Documentation

XML.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and QDXH.TO (Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - XML.TO tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index while QDXH.TO tracks the Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap Hedged to CAD Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XML.TO returned 9.44%/yr vs 12.27%/yr for QDXH.TO. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XML.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for QDXH.TO.

Performance

XML.TO vs. QDXH.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 Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QDXH.TO). 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 9.26% return, which is significantly lower than QDXH.TO's 12.31% 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%

QDXH.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
1.66%
6M
8.48%
YTD
12.31%
1Y
23.28%
3Y*
17.14%
5Y*
12.27%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
9.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

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

QDXH.TO

Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)
CA$113.84KCA$73.38KCA$49.63K

XML.TO

iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)
CA$12.85KCA$7.78KCA$9.01K

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

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XML.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		9.26%17.56%14.13%11.69%-6.94%13.27%-5.87%16.26%-5.38%
QDXH.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		12.31%21.99%13.25%14.25%-2.55%20.52%-0.42%20.43%-12.12%

Correlation

The correlation between XML.TO and QDXH.TO is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.23

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

0.26

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

0.25

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2018

0.19

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

Sectors
XML.TO
QDXH.TO

Financial Services

19.7%
24.5%

Industrials

15.7%
18.8%

Consumer Defensive

12.6%
6.8%

Healthcare

12.2%
10.4%

Communication Services

9.1%
4.4%

Utilities

9.0%
3.7%

Energy

7.7%
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
7.8%

Technology

4.4%
12.1%

Real Estate

2.9%
2.0%

Basic Materials

1.6%
5.8%

Financial Services

XML.TO
19.7%
QDXH.TO
24.5%

Industrials

XML.TO
15.7%
QDXH.TO
18.8%

Consumer Defensive

XML.TO
12.6%
QDXH.TO
6.8%

Healthcare

XML.TO
12.2%
QDXH.TO
10.4%

Communication Services

XML.TO
9.1%
QDXH.TO
4.4%

Utilities

XML.TO
9.0%
QDXH.TO
3.7%

Energy

XML.TO
7.7%
QDXH.TO
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XML.TO
5.1%
QDXH.TO
7.8%

Technology

XML.TO
4.4%
QDXH.TO
12.1%

Real Estate

XML.TO
2.9%
QDXH.TO
2.0%

Basic Materials

XML.TO
1.6%
QDXH.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 (CAD-Hedged)

Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with XML.TO:
XML.TO vs. XIN.TOXML.TO vs. XSP.TOXML.TO vs. XEQT.TOXML.TO vs. XMI.TOXML.TO vs. HXQ.TOXML.TO vs. XMW.TOXML.TO vs. XMU.TO
Often compared with QDXH.TO:
QDXH.TO vs. QDX.TOQDXH.TO vs. HXDM.TOQDXH.TO vs. QTIP.NEOQDXH.TO vs. MGRW.TOQDXH.TO vs. THE.TOQDXH.TO vs. QQQQ.TOQDXH.TO vs. KNGX.TO

Return for Risk

XML.TO vs. QDXH.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: 7373
Overall Rank
XML.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XML.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
XML.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
XML.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
XML.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
QDXH.TO
QDXH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
QDXH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDXH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDXH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
QDXH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDXH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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. QDXH.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 Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QDXH.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.TOQDXH.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.71
2.10

-0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.43
3.53

-1.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.62

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.45

2.62

-0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.64

10.93

-3.29

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

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

XML.TO vs. QDXH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XML.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.62%, smaller than the maximum QDXH.TO drawdown of -31.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XML.TO and QDXH.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XML.TOQDXH.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.62%

-31.75%

+3.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.46%

-9.85%

+3.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.46%

-13.49%

+6.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.34%

-15.79%

+3.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.62%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.69%

+0.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.43%

-3.82%

+0.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.07%

2.36%

-0.29%

Volatility

XML.TO vs. QDXH.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol EAFE Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XML.TO) is 2.68%, while Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QDXH.TO) has a volatility of 3.25%. This indicates that XML.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QDXH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XML.TOQDXH.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.68%

3.25%

-0.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.79%

10.45%

-2.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.27%

12.31%

-3.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.81%

12.78%

-2.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.92%

15.44%

-3.52%

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

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

Dividends

XML.TO vs. QDXH.TO - Dividend Comparison

XML.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.66%, more than QDXH.TO's 2.29% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
QDXH.TO
Mackenzie International Equity Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.29%2.41%2.64%2.76%2.92%2.28%1.96%2.65%3.13%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

XML.TO and QDXH.TO have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

QDXH.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for XML.TO.

XML.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while QDXH.TO tracks Solactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap Hedged to CAD Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Mackenzie. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for XML.TO and 0.17% for QDXH.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XML.TO and QDXH.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