PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMM.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF) and CWO.NEO (iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from iShares - XMM.TO tracks the Morningstar EM GR CAD while CWO.NEO tracks the FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMM.TO returned 6.86%/yr vs 11.43%/yr for CWO.NEO. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMM.TO charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.73%/yr for CWO.NEO.

Performance

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF (XMM.TO) and iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMM.TO achieves a 18.98% return, which is significantly higher than CWO.NEO's 13.80% return. Over the past 10 years, XMM.TO has underperformed CWO.NEO with an annualized return of 6.86%, while CWO.NEO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.43% annualized return.

XMM.TO

1D
-0.77%
1M
9.35%
YTD
18.98%
6M
17.95%
1Y
27.44%
3Y*
15.00%
5Y*
8.00%
10Y*
6.86%

CWO.NEO

1D
-1.42%
1M
4.14%
YTD
13.80%
6M
13.05%
1Y
35.32%
3Y*
23.05%
5Y*
11.55%
10Y*
11.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMM.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF		18.98%7.65%16.66%4.10%-7.83%3.95%4.32%1.36%2.35%18.74%
CWO.NEO
iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF		13.80%26.34%22.33%9.56%-9.03%7.13%-3.12%10.86%-0.29%17.16%

Correlation

The correlation between XMM.TO and CWO.NEO is 0.63, 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

0.63

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

0.48

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

0.46

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

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2012

0.60

The correlation between XMM.TO and CWO.NEO shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (5 years) to 0.63 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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 Emerging Markets Index ETF

iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF

Often compared with XMM.TO:
XMM.TO vs. XSEM.TOXMM.TO vs. XMU.TOXMM.TO vs. XEQT.TOXMM.TO vs. XEC.TOXMM.TO vs. HTAE.TOXMM.TO vs. VEE.TOXMM.TO vs. SPMO
Often compared with CWO.NEO:
CWO.NEO vs. XEC.TOCWO.NEO vs. VEE.TOCWO.NEO vs. EMGFCWO.NEO vs. ZEM.TOCWO.NEO vs. BRFCWO.NEO vs. VGRO.TOCWO.NEO vs. XEMC.TO

Return for Risk

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMM.TO
XMM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
XMM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
XMM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
CWO.NEO
CWO.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWO.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWO.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
CWO.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWO.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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.

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF (XMM.TO) and iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.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.

XMM.TOCWO.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.19
2.29

-0.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.24
3.05

+0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.43

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.15

3.26

-0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.25

12.37

-1.13

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

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMM.TO and CWO.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

XMM.TOCWO.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.19

2.29

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

0.70

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

0.66

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

0.45

+0.10

Drawdowns

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMM.TO drawdown since its inception was -22.07%, smaller than the maximum CWO.NEO drawdown of -31.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMM.TO and CWO.NEO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMM.TOCWO.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.07%

-31.99%

+9.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.76%

-10.90%

+2.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.94%

-17.12%

+7.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.42%

-24.80%

+9.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.07%

-31.97%

+9.90%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.77%

-1.42%

+0.65%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.21%

-10.29%

+5.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.45%

2.86%

-0.41%

Volatility

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF (XMM.TO) and iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) have volatilities of 5.38% and 5.40%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMM.TOCWO.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.38%

5.40%

-0.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.25%

12.46%

-1.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.57%

15.50%

-2.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.40%

16.65%

-6.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.02%

17.52%

-5.50%

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMM.TO has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than CWO.NEO's 0.73% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMM.TO vs. CWO.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XMM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.00%, less than CWO.NEO's 2.45% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CWO.NEO
iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF		2.45%2.79%3.50%4.14%5.03%4.61%2.64%3.01%3.22%2.60%2.57%3.23%
XMM.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF		2.00%2.37%2.95%2.55%1.55%1.91%2.09%2.44%2.21%2.09%2.32%2.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMM.TO and CWO.NEO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMM.TO is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMM.TO is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CWO.NEO.

XMM.TO tracks Morningstar EM GR CAD, while CWO.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for XMM.TO and 0.73% for CWO.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMM.TO and CWO.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