PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Canadian Real Return Bond Index ETF (XRB.TO) and Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XRB.TO achieves a 2.56% return, which is significantly higher than QTIP.NEO's 0.87% return.


XRB.TO

1D
-0.13%
1M
1.21%
YTD
2.56%
6M
0.86%
1Y
3.06%
3Y*
1.50%
5Y*
-1.66%
10Y*
0.06%

QTIP.NEO

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.21%
YTD
0.87%
6M
0.12%
1Y
2.85%
3Y*
2.70%
5Y*
0.18%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XRB.TO
iShares Canadian Real Return Bond Index ETF
2.56%0.05%3.95%-2.15%-15.01%-1.30%12.11%5.93%-0.44%
QTIP.NEO
Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)
0.87%4.82%0.82%3.50%-12.98%6.05%10.16%7.49%-0.75%

Correlation

The correlation between XRB.TO and QTIP.NEO is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.48

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

0.55

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

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2018

0.48

The correlation between XRB.TO and QTIP.NEO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

XRB.TO
XRB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
XRB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XRB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
XRB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
XRB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
XRB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

QTIP.NEO
QTIP.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
QTIP.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
QTIP.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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.

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Canadian Real Return Bond Index ETF (XRB.TO) and Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.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.


XRB.TOQTIP.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.14

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.87

1.42

-0.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.73

3.58

-1.85

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XRB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.45, which is lower than the QTIP.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XRB.TO and QTIP.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XRB.TOQTIP.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

0.81

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.14

0.03

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.35

-0.07

Drawdowns

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XRB.TO drawdown since its inception was -26.58%, which is greater than QTIP.NEO's maximum drawdown of -15.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRB.TO and QTIP.NEO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XRB.TOQTIP.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.58%

-15.03%

-11.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.55%

-2.02%

-1.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.65%

-4.59%

-6.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.58%

-15.03%

-11.55%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.56%

-4.09%

-9.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.09%

-4.78%

-2.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.78%

0.80%

+0.98%

Volatility

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Canadian Real Return Bond Index ETF (XRB.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.72% compared to Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (QTIP.NEO) at 1.27%. This indicates that XRB.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QTIP.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XRB.TOQTIP.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.72%

1.27%

+1.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.11%

2.48%

+2.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.85%

3.56%

+3.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.91%

6.25%

+5.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.35%

6.31%

+5.04%

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XRB.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than QTIP.NEO's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

XRB.TO vs. QTIP.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XRB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.63%, more than QTIP.NEO's 3.56% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QTIP.NEO
Mackenzie US TIPS Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)
3.56%4.54%4.53%5.08%9.47%5.24%2.17%2.29%2.91%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XRB.TO
iShares Canadian Real Return Bond Index ETF
3.63%3.73%2.36%2.36%1.83%1.23%1.36%1.72%1.74%1.69%1.58%1.61%

Frequently Asked Questions


XRB.TO and QTIP.NEO have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QTIP.NEO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QTIP.NEO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for XRB.TO.

XRB.TO tracks FTSE Canada Real Return Bond Index, while QTIP.NEO tracks Solactive US Treasury Inflation-Linked Bond Hedged to CAD TR Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Mackenzie. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for XRB.TO and 0.15% for QTIP.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XRB.TO and QTIP.NEO

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