XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO
XMS.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and BLOV.TO (Brompton North American Low Volatility Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMS.TO is a Low Volatility fund tracking the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while BLOV.TO is a Dividend fund actively managed by Brompton. XMS.TO is passively managed, while BLOV.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMS.TO returned 4.51%/yr vs 7.70%/yr for BLOV.TO. Their 0.31 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XMS.TO charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.76%/yr for BLOV.TO.
Performance
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMS.TO achieves a 3.79% return, which is significantly lower than BLOV.TO's 12.82% return.
XMS.TO
- 1D
- 1.45%
- 1M
- 1.17%
- 6M
- 3.55%
- YTD
- 3.79%
- 1Y
- 4.16%
- 3Y*
- 8.49%
- 5Y*
- 4.51%
- 10Y*
- 7.66%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.16%
BLOV.TO
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- -1.92%
- 6M
- 7.69%
- YTD
- 12.82%
- 1Y
- 17.89%
- 3Y*
- 12.52%
- 5Y*
- 7.70%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 9.29%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$1.10K | CA$11.60K | CA$10.90K | |
| CA$6.72K | CA$12.98K | CA$19.38K |
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMS.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 3.79% | 3.74% | 14.27% | 7.88% | -11.12% | 21.05% | 17.59% |
BLOV.TO Brompton North American Low Volatility Dividend ETF | 12.82% | 14.08% | 11.35% | -1.53% | -6.53% | 21.12% | 8.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMS.TO and BLOV.TO is 0.20, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.32 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2020 | 0.31 |
The correlation between XMS.TO and BLOV.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.20 (1 year) to 0.36 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Industrials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
Technology
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Healthcare
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Financial Services
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Consumer Defensive
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Utilities
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Industrials
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Communication Services
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Consumer Cyclical
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Energy
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
Real Estate
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
-
Basic Materials
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
-
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
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XMS.TO
BLOV.TO
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) and Brompton North American Low Volatility Dividend ETF (BLOV.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.
| XMS.TO | BLOV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.38 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.50 | 3.35 | -2.85 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.15 | 10.77 | -9.62 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMS.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.87%, smaller than the maximum BLOV.TO drawdown of -46.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMS.TO and BLOV.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMS.TO | BLOV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.87% | -46.98% | +10.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.32% | -5.23% | -3.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.80% | -40.46% | +30.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.06% | -46.98% | +27.92% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.87% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.71% | -1.92% | +1.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.42% | -4.46% | +0.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.62% | 1.63% | +1.99% |
Volatility
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) and Brompton North American Low Volatility Dividend ETF (BLOV.TO) have volatilities of 3.68% and 3.65%, 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
| XMS.TO | BLOV.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.68% | 3.65% | +0.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.00% | 7.91% | -0.91% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.58% | 9.20% | +1.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.44% | 33.18% | -20.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.25% | 30.06% | -14.81% |
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMS.TO has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than BLOV.TO's 0.76% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMS.TO vs. BLOV.TO - Dividend Comparison
XMS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, less than BLOV.TO's 3.78% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BLOV.TO Brompton North American Low Volatility Dividend ETF | 3.78% | 4.13% | 4.51% | 4.80% | 4.25% | 3.19% | 2.45% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMS.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 1.18% | 1.10% | 1.24% | 1.41% | 1.22% | 1.02% | 1.71% | 1.44% | 1.58% | 2.02% | 0.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMS.TO and BLOV.TO have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XMS.TO is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMS.TO is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for BLOV.TO.
XMS.TO is categorized as Low Volatility, while BLOV.TO is Dividend. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Brompton. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for XMS.TO and 0.76% for BLOV.TO.
Find the right allocation for XMS.TO and BLOV.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