PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XUH.TO (iShares Core S&P U.S. Total Market Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and XGRO.TO (iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio) are both exchange-traded funds - XUH.TO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Market TR CAD, while XGRO.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by iShares. XUH.TO is passively managed, while XGRO.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, XUH.TO returned 13.19%/yr vs 10.17%/yr for XGRO.TO. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XUH.TO charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XGRO.TO.

Performance

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P U.S. Total Market Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XUH.TO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XUH.TO achieves a 9.59% return, which is significantly lower than XGRO.TO's 10.70% return. Over the past 10 years, XUH.TO has outperformed XGRO.TO with an annualized return of 13.19%, while XGRO.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 10.17% annualized return.

XUH.TO

1D
-0.66%
1M
4.13%
YTD
9.59%
6M
9.67%
1Y
24.90%
3Y*
19.81%
5Y*
11.17%
10Y*
13.19%

XGRO.TO

1D
0.29%
1M
5.00%
YTD
10.70%
6M
8.71%
1Y
23.83%
3Y*
18.10%
5Y*
10.89%
10Y*
10.17%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XUH.TO
iShares Core S&P U.S. Total Market Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		9.59%15.11%22.45%24.06%-20.19%26.19%15.53%28.46%-7.51%20.10%
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		10.70%15.59%19.53%15.01%-11.08%14.29%11.51%17.97%-6.73%11.61%

Correlation

The correlation between XUH.TO and XGRO.TO is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.78

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

0.83

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

0.84

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

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 23, 2015

0.69

The correlation between XUH.TO and XGRO.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (all time) to 0.84 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XUH.TO
XGRO.TO

Technology

38.5%
25.8%

Financial Services

11.0%
20.3%

Communication Services

10.2%
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
6.3%

Industrials

8.3%
7.3%

Healthcare

8.2%
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.4%
3.8%

Energy

3.3%
7.2%

Utilities

2.5%
1.5%

Real Estate

2.0%
0.4%

Basic Materials

1.8%
5.6%

Technology

XUH.TO
38.5%
XGRO.TO
25.8%

Financial Services

XUH.TO
11.0%
XGRO.TO
20.3%

Communication Services

XUH.TO
10.2%
XGRO.TO
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

XUH.TO
9.6%
XGRO.TO
6.3%

Industrials

XUH.TO
8.3%
XGRO.TO
7.3%

Healthcare

XUH.TO
8.2%
XGRO.TO
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

XUH.TO
4.4%
XGRO.TO
3.8%

Energy

XUH.TO
3.3%
XGRO.TO
7.2%

Utilities

XUH.TO
2.5%
XGRO.TO
1.5%

Real Estate

XUH.TO
2.0%
XGRO.TO
0.4%

Basic Materials

XUH.TO
1.8%
XGRO.TO
5.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Core S&P U.S. Total Market Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio

Often compared with XUH.TO:
XUH.TO vs. XUU.TOXUH.TO vs. XUU-U.TOXUH.TO vs. VFV.TOXUH.TO vs. XSU.TOXUH.TO vs. VSP.TOXUH.TO vs. IUSGXUH.TO vs. VYM
Often compared with XGRO.TO:
XGRO.TO vs. XEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. VGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. VEQT.TOXGRO.TO vs. XCG.TOXGRO.TO vs. TGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TOXGRO.TO vs. XAW.TO

Return for Risk

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XUH.TO
XUH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
XUH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XUH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
XUH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
XUH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
XUH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO
XGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P U.S. Total Market Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XUH.TO) and iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.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.

XUH.TOXGRO.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.02
2.22

-0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.82
3.13

-0.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.42

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.66

3.36

-0.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.06

14.92

-2.86

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

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XUH.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is comparable to the XGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XUH.TO and XGRO.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

XUH.TOXGRO.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.02

2.22

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.66

0.99

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.71

0.83

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.64

0.36

+0.28

Drawdowns

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XUH.TO drawdown since its inception was -38.37%, smaller than the maximum XGRO.TO drawdown of -47.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XUH.TO and XGRO.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XUH.TOXGRO.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.37%

-47.97%

+9.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.41%

-7.12%

-2.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.32%

-12.47%

-6.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.11%

-18.40%

-7.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.37%

-25.85%

-12.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.66%

0.00%

-0.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.96%

-8.49%

+3.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.07%

1.60%

+0.47%

Volatility

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core S&P U.S. Total Market Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XUH.TO) is 3.21%, while iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) has a volatility of 3.40%. This indicates that XUH.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XGRO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XUH.TOXGRO.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.21%

3.40%

-0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.36%

9.20%

+0.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.41%

10.78%

+1.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.08%

11.05%

+6.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.70%

12.26%

+6.44%

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XUH.TO has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than XGRO.TO's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XUH.TO vs. XGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

XUH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, less than XGRO.TO's 1.75% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XGRO.TO
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio		1.75%1.92%1.98%2.22%1.86%1.66%1.94%2.21%7.42%2.04%2.65%2.15%
XUH.TO
iShares Core S&P U.S. Total Market Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.82%0.91%1.10%1.15%1.40%0.98%1.25%1.67%1.81%1.25%1.63%1.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

XUH.TO and XGRO.TO have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XUH.TO is cheaper at 0.08% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XUH.TO is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

XUH.TO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while XGRO.TO is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XUH.TO and 0.20% for XGRO.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XUH.TO and XGRO.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