XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

XMS.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and FLVI.NEO (Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index 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 FLVI.NEO is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Franklin International ex North America Low Volatility High Dividend Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XMS.TO returned 4.16% vs 27.55% for FLVI.NEO. Their 0.20 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XMS.TO charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for FLVI.NEO.

Performance

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) and Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (FLVI.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMS.TO achieves a 3.79% return, which is significantly lower than FLVI.NEO's 14.48% 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%

FLVI.NEO

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 1.64%
• 6M: 8.45%
• YTD: 14.48%
• 1Y: 27.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 24.42%

*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)
FLVI.NEO Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF	CA$609.67K	CA$798.82K	CA$895.82K
XMS.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	CA$6.72K	CA$12.98K	CA$19.38K

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XMS.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)	3.79%	3.74%	7.37%
FLVI.NEO Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF	14.48%	33.34%	9.70%

Correlation

The correlation between XMS.TO and FLVI.NEO is 0.18, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2024	0.20

Return for Risk

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XMS.TO

XMS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 18
XMS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
XMS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
XMS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 18
XMS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
XMS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 18

FLVI.NEO

FLVI.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 90
FLVI.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
FLVI.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
FLVI.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 93
FLVI.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
FLVI.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 85

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - 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 Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (FLVI.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.

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	FLVI.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.40	2.76	-2.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.62	3.81	-3.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.52	-0.43
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.50	3.61	-3.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.15	13.55	-12.40

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the FLVI.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMS.TO and FLVI.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.

Drawdowns

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMS.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.87%, which is greater than FLVI.NEO's maximum drawdown of -11.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMS.TO and FLVI.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMS.TO	FLVI.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.87%	-11.90%	-24.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.32%	-7.71%	-0.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.80%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.87%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	0.00%	-0.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.42%	-1.51%	-2.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.62%	2.04%	+1.58%

Volatility

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.68% compared to Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (FLVI.NEO) at 2.34%. This indicates that XMS.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLVI.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMS.TO	FLVI.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.68%	2.34%	+1.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.00%	8.06%	-1.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.58%	10.10%	+0.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.44%	12.61%	-0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.25%	12.61%	+2.64%

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMS.TO has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than FLVI.NEO's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMS.TO vs. FLVI.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XMS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, less than FLVI.NEO's 2.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FLVI.NEO Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF	2.73%	3.07%	3.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both XMS.TO and FLVI.NEO in my portfolio?

XMS.TO and FLVI.NEO have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XMS.TO or FLVI.NEO?

On fees, FLVI.NEO is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMS.TO or FLVI.NEO?

FLVI.NEO is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for XMS.TO.

What is the main difference between XMS.TO and FLVI.NEO?

XMS.TO is categorized as Low Volatility, while FLVI.NEO is Foreign Large Cap Equities. XMS.TO tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while FLVI.NEO tracks Franklin International ex North America Low Volatility High Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for XMS.TO and 0.28% for FLVI.NEO.