PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMS.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and QQC-F.TO (Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged) are both exchange-traded funds - XMS.TO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while QQC-F.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMS.TO returned 7.82%/yr vs 20.30%/yr for QQC-F.TO. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMS.TO charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for QQC-F.TO.

Performance

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - 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 Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged (QQC-F.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMS.TO achieves a 1.17% return, which is significantly lower than QQC-F.TO's 19.79% return. Over the past 10 years, XMS.TO has underperformed QQC-F.TO with an annualized return of 7.82%, while QQC-F.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 20.30% annualized 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%

QQC-F.TO

1D
-0.22%
1M
10.71%
YTD
19.79%
6M
17.83%
1Y
38.43%
3Y*
26.56%
5Y*
16.33%
10Y*
20.30%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMS.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		1.17%3.71%14.23%7.84%-11.15%21.02%1.81%26.70%-1.63%16.85%
QQC-F.TO
Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged		19.79%18.41%24.19%52.81%-33.42%27.15%45.04%37.63%-2.23%31.94%

Correlation

The correlation between XMS.TO and QQC-F.TO is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.24

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

0.31

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

0.38

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

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2016

0.39

The correlation between XMS.TO and QQC-F.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.24 (1 year) to 0.40 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMS.TO
QQC-F.TO

Technology

29.8%
53.8%

Financial Services

14.0%
0.2%

Healthcare

12.7%
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

9.9%
7.7%

Utilities

7.5%
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

6.2%
12.3%

Industrials

6.2%
2.8%

Communication Services

5.9%
15.8%

Energy

3.5%
0.6%

Real Estate

2.2%
0.1%

Basic Materials

2.1%
1.1%

Technology

XMS.TO
29.8%
QQC-F.TO
53.8%

Financial Services

XMS.TO
14.0%
QQC-F.TO
0.2%

Healthcare

XMS.TO
12.7%
QQC-F.TO
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

XMS.TO
9.9%
QQC-F.TO
7.7%

Utilities

XMS.TO
7.5%
QQC-F.TO
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XMS.TO
6.2%
QQC-F.TO
12.3%

Industrials

XMS.TO
6.2%
QQC-F.TO
2.8%

Communication Services

XMS.TO
5.9%
QQC-F.TO
15.8%

Energy

XMS.TO
3.5%
QQC-F.TO
0.6%

Real Estate

XMS.TO
2.2%
QQC-F.TO
0.1%

Basic Materials

XMS.TO
2.1%
QQC-F.TO
1.1%

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 USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged

Often compared with XMS.TO:
XMS.TO vs. XMU.TOXMS.TO vs. VFV.TOXMS.TO vs. XDU.TOXMS.TO vs. VSP.TOXMS.TO vs. XUS.TOXMS.TO vs. SPYXMS.TO vs. ZSP.TO
Often compared with QQC-F.TO:
QQC-F.TO vs. QQC.TOQQC-F.TO vs. XEQT.TOQQC-F.TO vs. QQQQQC-F.TO vs. HXQ.TOQQC-F.TO vs. QQQMQQC-F.TO vs. XQQ.TOQQC-F.TO vs. VFV.TO

Return for Risk

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMS.TO
XMS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
XMS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
XMS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
QQC-F.TO
QQC-F.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
QQC-F.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQC-F.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQC-F.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
QQC-F.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQC-F.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.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 Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged (QQC-F.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.TOQQC-F.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.01
2.43

-2.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.07
3.23

-3.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.01

1.42

-0.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.01

2.93

-2.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.03

10.91

-10.88

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

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.01, which is lower than the QQC-F.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMS.TO and QQC-F.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XMS.TOQQC-F.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.01

2.43

-2.42

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

0.91

-0.37

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.92

-0.38

Drawdowns

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMS.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.48%, roughly equal to the maximum QQC-F.TO drawdown of -36.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMS.TO and QQC-F.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMS.TOQQC-F.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.48%

-36.03%

-0.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.91%

-13.16%

+6.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.82%

-22.76%

+12.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.23%

-36.03%

+16.80%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.48%

-36.03%

-0.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.73%

-0.22%

-1.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.26%

-5.50%

+1.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.54%

3.53%

-0.99%

Volatility

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) is 2.35%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged (QQC-F.TO) has a volatility of 4.49%. This indicates that XMS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQC-F.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMS.TOQQC-F.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.35%

4.49%

-2.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.14%

12.08%

-5.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.75%

15.89%

-7.14%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.11%

22.45%

-10.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.74%

22.54%

-7.80%

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMS.TO has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than QQC-F.TO's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMS.TO vs. QQC-F.TO - Dividend Comparison

XMS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, while QQC-F.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QQC-F.TO
Invesco NASDAQ 100 Index ETF CAD Hedged		0.00%0.09%0.50%0.57%0.89%0.66%0.49%0.64%0.77%0.66%0.81%0.76%
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%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMS.TO and QQC-F.TO have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QQC-F.TO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QQC-F.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for XMS.TO.

XMS.TO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while QQC-F.TO is Nasdaq-100. XMS.TO tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while QQC-F.TO tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for XMS.TO and 0.20% for QQC-F.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMS.TO and QQC-F.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