XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO
XMS.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and HULC.TO (Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - XMS.TO tracks the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index while HULC.TO tracks the Solactive US Large Cap Index (CA NTR). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMS.TO returned 5.12%/yr vs 34.17%/yr for HULC.TO. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMS.TO charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for HULC.TO.
Performance
XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMS.TO achieves a 1.17% return, which is significantly lower than HULC.TO's 12.50% return.
XMS.TO
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 1.94%
- YTD
- 1.17%
- 6M
- -0.55%
- 1Y
- 0.08%
- 3Y*
- 8.89%
- 5Y*
- 5.12%
- 10Y*
- 7.82%
HULC.TO
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 7.49%
- YTD
- 12.50%
- 6M
- 10.64%
- 1Y
- 29.64%
- 3Y*
- 24.34%
- 5Y*
- 34.17%
- 10Y*
- —
XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMS.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 1.17% | 3.71% | 14.23% | 7.84% | -11.15% | 21.02% | 9.72% |
HULC.TO Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF | 12.50% | 12.69% | 35.93% | 24.43% | -14.75% | 153.78% | 26.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMS.TO and HULC.TO is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 2020 | 0.44 |
The correlation between XMS.TO and HULC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (1 year) to 0.44 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Financial Services
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Healthcare
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Consumer Defensive
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Utilities
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Consumer Cyclical
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Industrials
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Communication Services
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Energy
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Real Estate
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
Basic Materials
XMS.TO
HULC.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. HULC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XMS.TO
HULC.TO
XMS.TO vs. HULC.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 Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF (HULC.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.
| XMS.TO | HULC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.44 | -0.43 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.01 | 3.41 | -3.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.03 | 12.23 | -12.20 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XMS.TO | HULC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.01 | 2.38 | -2.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 | 0.73 | -0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 0.75 | -0.21 |
Drawdowns
XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMS.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.48%, which is greater than HULC.TO's maximum drawdown of -23.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMS.TO and HULC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMS.TO | HULC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.48% | -23.94% | -12.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.91% | -8.73% | +1.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.82% | -19.46% | +9.64% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.23% | -23.94% | +4.71% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.48% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.73% | -0.15% | -1.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.26% | -4.68% | +0.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.54% | 2.43% | +0.11% |
Volatility
XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) is 2.35%, while Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF (HULC.TO) has a volatility of 3.01%. This indicates that XMS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HULC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMS.TO | HULC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.35% | 3.01% | -0.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.14% | 9.25% | -3.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.75% | 12.53% | -3.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.11% | 46.99% | -34.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.74% | 43.82% | -29.08% |
XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMS.TO has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than HULC.TO's 0.08% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMS.TO vs. HULC.TO - Dividend Comparison
XMS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, while HULC.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HULC.TO Global X US Large Cap Index Corporate Class ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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% | 1.08% | 1.21% | 1.38% | 1.20% | 0.99% | 1.66% | 1.40% | 1.54% | 1.53% | 1.43% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMS.TO and HULC.TO have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HULC.TO is cheaper at 0.08% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HULC.TO is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for XMS.TO.
XMS.TO tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while HULC.TO tracks Solactive US Large Cap Index (CA NTR). They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for XMS.TO and 0.08% for HULC.TO.
Find the right allocation for XMS.TO and HULC.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