PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMW.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF) and FGEP.TO (Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF) are both Global Equities funds. XMW.TO is passively managed, while FGEP.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, XMW.TO returned 5.74% vs 33.16% for FGEP.TO. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMW.TO charges 0.48%/yr vs 1.16%/yr for FGEP.TO.

Performance

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (XMW.TO) and Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF (FGEP.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMW.TO achieves a 3.60% return, which is significantly lower than FGEP.TO's 16.78% return.

XMW.TO

1D
0.07%
1M
3.38%
YTD
3.60%
6M
2.07%
1Y
5.74%
3Y*
10.78%
5Y*
7.90%
10Y*
7.50%

FGEP.TO

1D
-0.40%
1M
6.04%
YTD
16.78%
6M
17.33%
1Y
33.16%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024
XMW.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF		3.60%5.84%10.30%
FGEP.TO
Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF		16.78%17.44%9.99%

Correlation

The correlation between XMW.TO and FGEP.TO is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2024

0.47

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 Global Index ETF

Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF

Often compared with XMW.TO:
XMW.TO vs. ZLB.TOXMW.TO vs. ACWVXMW.TO vs. XMV.TOXMW.TO vs. XEF.TOXMW.TO vs. XEQT.TOXMW.TO vs. XDIV.TOXMW.TO vs. VXC.TO
Often compared with FGEP.TO:
FGEP.TO vs. FINN.NEOFGEP.TO vs. XEQT.TOFGEP.TO vs. VVO.TOFGEP.TO vs. CAGE.TOFGEP.TO vs. BREA.TOFGEP.TO vs. FCMO.NEOFGEP.TO vs. VMO.TO

Return for Risk

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMW.TO
XMW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
XMW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
XMW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank
FGEP.TO
FGEP.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
FGEP.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FGEP.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
FGEP.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
FGEP.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
FGEP.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (XMW.TO) and Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF (FGEP.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.

XMW.TOFGEP.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.75
3.19

-2.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.10
4.40

-3.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.61

-0.47

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.12

4.67

-3.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.08

19.65

-16.56

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

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMW.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.75, which is lower than the FGEP.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMW.TO and FGEP.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

XMW.TOFGEP.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.75

3.19

-2.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.91

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.68

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.94

1.78

-0.83

Drawdowns

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMW.TO drawdown since its inception was -21.42%, which is greater than FGEP.TO's maximum drawdown of -14.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMW.TO and FGEP.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMW.TOFGEP.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.42%

-14.78%

-6.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.14%

-7.14%

+2.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.59%

—

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.45%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-21.42%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.58%

-0.66%

+0.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.74%

-1.64%

-1.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.87%

1.69%

+0.18%

Volatility

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (XMW.TO) is 1.87%, while Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF (FGEP.TO) has a volatility of 3.81%. This indicates that XMW.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FGEP.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMW.TOFGEP.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.87%

3.81%

-1.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.59%

8.34%

-2.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.67%

10.47%

-2.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.70%

12.70%

-4.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.07%

12.70%

-1.63%

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMW.TO has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than FGEP.TO's 1.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMW.TO vs. FGEP.TO - Dividend Comparison

XMW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, while FGEP.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FGEP.TO
Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XMW.TO
iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF		1.52%1.58%1.81%1.98%1.66%1.43%1.52%2.20%2.01%1.61%2.02%1.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMW.TO and FGEP.TO have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMW.TO is cheaper at 0.48% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMW.TO is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 1.16% for FGEP.TO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for XMW.TO and 1.16% for FGEP.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMW.TO and FGEP.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