XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XUS.TO (iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF) and CBIL.TO (Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XUS.TO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while CBIL.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund actively managed by Global X. XUS.TO is passively managed, while CBIL.TO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XUS.TO returned 23.52%/yr vs 3.63%/yr for CBIL.TO. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XUS.TO charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for CBIL.TO.

Performance

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) and Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XUS.TO achieves a 12.21% return, which is significantly higher than CBIL.TO's 0.85% return.

XUS.TO

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 7.22%
• YTD: 12.21%
• 6M: 10.39%
• 1Y: 29.30%
• 3Y*: 23.52%
• 5Y*: 16.78%
• 10Y*: 15.98%

CBIL.TO

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.20%
• YTD: 0.85%
• 6M: 1.08%
• 1Y: 2.34%
• 3Y*: 3.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XUS.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF	12.21%	12.19%	35.16%	15.39%
CBIL.TO Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF	0.85%	2.68%	4.47%	3.36%

Correlation

The correlation between XUS.TO and CBIL.TO is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.04
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2023	0.03

Return for Risk

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XUS.TO

XUS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 73
XUS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
XUS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
XUS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 77
XUS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
XUS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 68

CBIL.TO

CBIL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 99
CBIL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
CBIL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
CBIL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CBIL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CBIL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) and Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.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.

	XUS.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.55	9.47	-6.92
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.47	23.59	-20.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	5.38	-3.91
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.41	58.74	-55.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.94	339.60	-326.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XUS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is lower than the CBIL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 9.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XUS.TO and CBIL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XUS.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.55	9.47	-6.92
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.13	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.98	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.08	11.64	-10.55

Drawdowns

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XUS.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.23%, which is greater than CBIL.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XUS.TO and CBIL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XUS.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.23%	-0.06%	-27.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.63%	-0.04%	-8.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.96%	-0.06%	-18.90%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.85%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.31%	0.00%	-0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.46%	-0.00%	-3.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.27%	0.01%	+2.26%

Volatility

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.19% compared to Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF (CBIL.TO) at 0.08%. This indicates that XUS.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBIL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XUS.TO	CBIL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.19%	0.08%	+3.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.66%	0.19%	+8.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.58%	0.25%	+11.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.92%	0.31%	+14.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.48%	0.31%	+16.17%

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XUS.TO has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than CBIL.TO's 0.10% 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

XUS.TO vs. CBIL.TO - Dividend Comparison

XUS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, less than CBIL.TO's 2.29% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CBIL.TO Global X 0-3 Month T-Bill ETF	2.29%	2.59%	4.38%	3.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XUS.TO iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF	1.12%	1.26%	1.03%	1.22%	1.38%	0.99%	1.35%	2.02%	1.77%	1.48%	1.66%	1.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XUS.TO and CBIL.TO in my portfolio?

XUS.TO and CBIL.TO have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XUS.TO or CBIL.TO?

On fees, XUS.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XUS.TO or CBIL.TO?

XUS.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for CBIL.TO.

What is the main difference between XUS.TO and CBIL.TO?

XUS.TO is categorized as S&P 500, while CBIL.TO is Canadian Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for XUS.TO and 0.10% for CBIL.TO.