Category: Uncategorized

Can I take advantage of higher US interest rates?

RobH5 Comments

I have a dedicated non-registered account in my retirement portfolio that is the cash cushion for VPW’s decumulation strategy. You can read about the details of how I currently get paid in retirement here.

That non-registered account holds about 85% Canadian dollars, invested in ZMMK, with the remaining 15% invested in ICSH. Both of these ETFs are very short-term bond funds and give me a slight advantage over investing in zero-risk HISAs. ZMMK and ICSH are part of my ETF all-stars lineup, and I track HISA rates on a monthly basis.

The fact is that US interest rates are a lot higher than Canadian interest rates, almost 2% higher as of July 2025. It seems to me that I should take advantage of that fact. Taking advantage of this situation would mean selling some ZMMK, performing Norbert’s Gambit with the resultant cash, and then buying ICSH. There are costs involved at every step of the way1:

  • Selling ZMMK means I’ll get dinged with the bid/ask spread2
  • Performing Norbert’s Gambit costs $9.95 plus HST on Questrade to do the necessary journaling
  • There will be bid/ask spreads to pull off the Gambit…once when buying DLR, once when selling DLR.U
  • Buying ICSH means another bid/ask spread

So at what point is it worth it? Let’s do a bit of math using the following assumptions:

  • The delta between US and Canadian rates is 1.8% in favor of the US rate. That’s an annual rate, and I’ll just divide by 12 to get a monthly rate3.
  • The bid/ask spread for DLR per the ETF fact sheet is 0.1% on the CAD side and 0.07% on the USD side
  • The bid/ask spread for ZMMK is 0.02% per its fact sheet
  • …and the bid/ask spread for ICSH is 0.02% as well per its fact sheet
  • No change in the FX rate for the duration of this exercise4
  • No fees to trade DLR, DLR.U, ZMMK or ICSH5

So for various amounts, the time to profitability6 of doing the Gambit looks like this.

$ CAD changedJournaling Fee7DLR Spread Fee8ZMMK/ICSH spreadTotal costTTP9
$1k$12$1.70$0.40$14.10~10 months
$10k$12$17.10$4$33.10~10 weeks
$100k$12$170$40$222~6 weeks

So clearly, for amounts around $1k this isn’t such an attractive proposition as the costs will take a fair bit of time to be negated by the bump in interest rates. For larger amounts, I’d say it’s worth it. Given ZMMK hasn’t yet paid out its dividend for the month, I guess I’ll wait until I’m ex-dividend (July 30, 2025, per the fact sheet) before doing this transaction.

  1. I’m also ignoring the tax on any capital gains I might pull off. It will be quite small, and will be close to 0. ↩︎
  2. Bid/ask spread is the difference between what the price holders are willing to sell at versus the price offered by a buyer. For ZMMK this is typically 1 cent. ↩︎
  3. Whether this delta continues to hold is anybody’s guess. ↩︎
  4. Which, admittedly, has no hope of being correct. If you do this sort of thing frequently enough, it ought to even out over time. ↩︎
  5. This is true at Questrade. YMMV with your broker. ↩︎
  6. Henceforth “TTP”, naturally ↩︎
  7. Adding HST and rounding ↩︎
  8. Buying DLR is 0.1% and selling it is 0.07% ↩︎
  9. Investing all holdings at 1.8% annual rate of return ↩︎

Dealing with Drift in Asset Allocation ETFs

RobH1 Comment

I rely a lot on asset-allocation ETFs in my retirement portfolio, mostly XGRO in the CAD side of the portfolio and AOA on the USD side1. These ETFs (about 70% of my overall retirement portfolio, as you can see here), like all asset-allocation ETFs, rebalance their holdings periodically in order to stick to their asset allocation targets. This aligns perfectly with my way of investing; I’ve always tried to stick to my asset allocation targets portfolio-wide, assisted by tools like my multi-asset tracker spreadsheet. (If you aren’t familiar with asset-allocation as an investment strategy, you could give this article a read.)

XGRO’s asset allocation targets are written right in the prospectus2:

  • 80% Equity, with 36% US equity, 20% Canadian Equity, 20% International Developed Market Equity, 4% Emerging Market Equity.
  • 20% Bonds, 16% being held in Canadian bonds. The other 4% are designated “non-Canadian” but seems like it’s always US bonds.

Anyway, XGRO’s approach to making changes to the portfolio in order to maintain this target percentage is written in the prospectus too:

XGRO’s portfolio will be monitored relative to the asset class target weights and will be rebalanced back to asset class target weights from time to time …XGRO’s portfolio is not expected to deviate from the asset class target weights by more than one-tenth of the target weight for a given asset class

Page 419 of the iShares Prospectus (June 2025)

Now “from time to time” isn’t terribly precise. I thought I’d take a closer look at the history of XGRO’s asset allocations. So I dug through annual and semi-annual reports as well as the website. I focused on the Fixed Income (aka Bond) proportion of XGRO over time because that’s the asset class that’s most likely to drift lower3…equities typically outperform fixed income historically. So this is what I found:

So there is a bit of drift in the fixed income portion of XGRO, but in the past year I haven’t seen it off by more than 1.2%, meaning that the promise made in XGRO’s prospectus is being adhered to.4

Turning now to AOA, the fixed income proportion is clearly stated to be 20%, and rebalancing is stated to happen twice annually, in April and October. After that, things become a bit harder to work out56. The various equity contributions are determined by the target index, namely the S&P Target Risk Aggressive Index, which are constructed by using market capitalization of the various indices used7.

Anyway, like XGRO, what I’m most concerned about is the fixed income portion of AOA, and digging through the various reports, I came up with this:

Of late, the fixed income portion AOA has become small, almost 2% lower than it should be. And given that AOA is about 50% of my holdings, it means that my equity exposure is quite a bit higher than I would let it drift myself.

I suppose the next rebalancing in October 2025 will correct this, but I admit it makes me a little uneasy to see that sort of volatility in the asset allocation8. I could of course just sell some AOA and reinvest it in some bond fund (AOA uses IUSB and IAGG, which seem like fine choices) but then I’m just working around the asset allocation strategy I’m paying for in AOA’s management fees, which seems dumb. Not to mention that anything I do now will almost certainly have to be undone come October.

So I guess this all means I should just let sleeping dogs lie. I have minor bits of money to reinvest every month (I still contribute to my TFSAs) so using those funds to buy bonds are probably what I’ll do. It’s a tiny pre-correction that should be addressed come October…or by the next equity meltdown.

  1. And both are on my “ETF all-stars” page ↩︎
  2. And since detailed targets are clearly stated, these are the percentages I assume for XGRO in my multi-asset tracker spreadsheet. I could continually update the percentages since they calculated daily on XGRO’s page, but it seems like busywork. ↩︎
  3. My retirement decumulation strategy (VPW) relies on knowing what my asset allocation is, too ↩︎
  4. It does mean, however, that my equity exposure Is higher than I thought. ↩︎
  5. Well, or maybe I’m just not that smart — I’m not really sure if one can calculate the market caps needed to work out the allocations. ↩︎
  6. And unlike XGRO, I actually do track (from time to time) the underlying allocations of AOA so that my multi-asset tracker reflects reality. It was through my most recent update that I discovered that the bond portion of AOA was a lot lower than it had been. ↩︎
  7. Namely the S&P500, the S&P MidCap 400, the S&P SmallCap 600, the S&P Developed Ex-U.S. BMI, and the S&P Emerging BMI ↩︎
  8. It’s still within the stated drift that XGRO tolerates, however. So maybe I’m overthinking this. ↩︎

Capped Index Funds: Good Idea?

RobHLeave a comment

One nagging concern I’ve heard about index investing1 is that you can end up overly concentrated in a handful of stocks. For example, as of today, per XGRO’s fact sheet, for every $100 I have invested in XGRO, I’m actually investing almost $5 between two companies, NVIDIA and Microsoft. And for every $100 I have invested in AOA, it’s $7 in these two companies. Although that sounds like it might be a significant concentration, I found a way to test the correlation using https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/asset-correlations. As you can see, XGRO and NVIDIA are not terribly well-correlated:

Not very strong correlation between XGRO and NVIDIA

…even though perhaps I perhaps wish they were (sigh):

Wishing XGRO was more strongly correlated with NVIDIA…

Anyway, if you’re still not comfortable with having too much concentration in your holdings, there are ETFs that limit exposure to any one stock in an index. iShares launched an ETF last year that tracks the S&P 500 while limiting the contribution of any member of that index to 3%. That product is called XUSC, which serves as a complement to its XUS uncapped S&P 500 ETF2. So when you compare XUS’s top holdings to those of XUSC, you can quickly spot the difference:

Top HoldingsXUS (S&P 500)XUSC (capped S&P 500)3
NVIDIA7.86%3.49%
Microsoft7.09%3.12%
Apple5.90%3.07%
Amazon4%3.07%
Meta2.86%2.93%
Broadcom2.49%2.96%
Alphabet class A2%1.66%
Tesla1.73%2.05%
Alphabet class C1.63%1.35%
Berkshire Hathaway1.62%1.93%
Comparing top % holdings between XUS and XUSC as of July 2025

For the TSX, there’s not a full equivalent. The closest pairing for the TSX is XIC4 and XIU:

TickerIndexCapped?# of stocks
XICS&P/TSX Capped CompositeYes214
XIUS&P/TSX 60No615

XIC holds a lot more companies, and in addition to capping any single company, this has the effect of shifting the emphasis to smaller companies. So does this make a big difference in performance? Let’s check using this calculator.

So not much difference; over the past 5.5 years, we see a very slight edge to XIU, the uncapped TSX60 fund.

Whether the relationship between XIU and XIC will be the same as XUS/XUSC is anybody’s guess. In my own case, I don’t own the capped version of the S&P 500, but I do own XIC over XIU, mostly because of its significantly lower MER (0.06% versus 0.18% for XIU).

  1. And my biggest holdings (AOA and XGRO) are nothing more than a collection of index funds: S&P 500, TSX, MSCI EAFE… ↩︎
  2. There’s also currency-hedged variants of these, but I never bother with hedging, it just adds expense and tracking errors. ↩︎
  3. You may wonder why an ETF that advertises itself as capping components at 3% has components that exceed 3%. I also have this question. I suppose they probably only trade when the exception is maintained for a period of time, or perhaps by a more significant margin. Otherwise, they’d trade stocks that hovered around the 3% threshold excessively. ↩︎
  4. The “C” is either for “Capped” or “Composite”, you decide. ↩︎
  5. I can’t explain why a “TSX 60” ETF has 61 assets. Maybe they count cash as the 61st? ↩︎

TD versus iShares: XEQT/XGRO/XBAL versus TEQT/TGRO/TBAL

RobH4 Comments

My post talking about BMO’s fee reduction for their asset allocation family enticed me to revisit competitive asset allocation funds. TD’s low-low fees (0.17% versus the 0.20% of iShares) are tempting.

So, quick sanity check — what’s the historical performance of XGRO versus TGRO?12

Per https://www.canadastockchannel.com/compound-returns-calculator/ (featured in Tools I Use) I see:

What? The TD fund has returned a full 2 percentage points better? This is a bit hard to believe. They must be rather different somehow?

Ah, yes. Revisiting their respective fund pages reveals that TGRO has a lower allocation for bonds — it’s only 10% versus the 20% for XGRO. More bonds will definitely lower return as a reward for lower volatility (I showed that effect here), so that probably explains the difference.

XGRO versus TGRO: Asset Allocation

So comparing the returns of XGRO versus TGRO wasn’t an apples to apples comparison. I could instead measure the relative returns of XBAL versus TBAL since the equity/bond ratios of these two are equivalent (both at 60% equity, 40% bonds)3. There are, however, some minor differences in the equity side of the equation:

XBAL versus TBAL: Asset Allocation

TBAL has a higher weighting in Canadian equity at the expense of some International equity, let’s see how that translates in the overall return:

That’s a lot closer, but the advantage still tilts TBAL’s way, which is another positive argument for considering it.

I am curious about how different these two are under the hood.

The first obvious difference is that they use different market indexes to build their portfolios, summarized below:

TGRO/TBALXGRO/XBAL
CAD EquitySolactive Canada Broad Market IndexS&P®/TSX® Capped Composite Index
US EquitySolactive US Large Cap CAD IndexS&P Total Market Index
Int’l EquitySolactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD IndexMSCI EAFE® Investable Market Index, MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index
Bonds FTSE Canada Universe Bond IndexFTSE Canada Universe Bond Index and others
Underlying indices tracked by TGRO and XGRO

So sure, the indices are different, but is it really a big deal? Doing a bit of digging I can confidently say that:

  • On the Canadian Equity front, TGRO’s holdings are more broad and include smaller stocks.
  • On the US Equity front, the opposite is true — XGRO holds more smaller US stocks
  • On the International Equity front, XGRO has exposure to Emerging markets that TGRO lacks
  • On the bond front, XGRO includes non-Canadian holdings, so a bit more diversified

Are any of these differences of great significance? No idea. Doubtful. TGRO has a recent small (0.5%) advantage, which is still worth digging in to. I took a look at the underlying assets…It’s easiest to do that by looking at the ETFs that underpin TGRO, one by one (TPU, TTP and TTE). XGRO’s product page shows the underlying assets so you don’t have to do the same (tedious) exercise for it.

Top CAD EquityTop US EquityTop Int’l Equity
TEQT/TGRO/TBALRBC, Shopify, TD, Enbridge, BrookfieldMicrosoft, NVIDIA, Apple, Amazon, MetaSAP, ASML, Nestle, Novo Nordisk, Roche
XEQT/XGRO/XBALRBC, Shopify, TD, Enbridge, BrookfieldMicrosoft, NVIDIA, Apple, Amazon, MetaTaiwan Semi, SAP, ASML, Nestle, Novo Nordisk
Top stock holdings, by asset category, for TGRO and XGRO

Hmph. Almost the same. I guess the difference is really coming down to an advantageous geographic mix for TBAL over XBAL, which may or may not be repeated. As compared to TBAL, XBAL’s greater focus on equities outside North America hurt its performance in the last 5 years.

All this to say that TGRO/TBAL look like fine products, with no real reason not to recommend them. For me, one small complexity with TGRO is its bond allocation, which is lower than XGRO’s, meaning that to keep my usual 20% bond allocation, I would have to either buy a standalone bond fund or buy a TEQT/TBAL combo (a 50/50 ratio works, I did the math).

Perhaps you’ll start to see some of these funds in my monthly update — stay tuned!

  1. I wouldn’t normally do this, especially since the funds don’t have a long history, but in this case I see that the TD funds use obscure (to me) indices so I want to quickly see if there’s a major difference in return. ↩︎
  2. XGRO is the mainstay of the CAD portion of my retirement portfolio and TGRO looks to be the same thing. ↩︎
  3. You may wonder if this is really a valid comparison since what I actually care about is TGRO versus XGRO. I think it is a valid comparison since TBAL and XBAL are still relying on the same underlying indices to build their respective funds, it’s just that the percentages vary. That’s pretty much how most all-in-ones approach the problem of building multiple risk levels: take a set of ingredients (the indicies) and mix them in different ratios to get to the final all-in-one product. It’s really a test to see if TBAL’s indices are somehow “better” than XBAL’s. ↩︎

Mini-Review: PortfolioPilot

RobH1 Comment

I discovered PortfolioPilot (https://portfoliopilot.com/), a product of Global Predictions, because it’s mentioned in passing on Passiv’s dashboard. (You can read a bit about Passiv over here — the premium version of Passiv used to be offered for free to all Questrade users, but it’s now part of their shiny new subscription service1.)

So what is PortfolioPilot? Let’s hand it over to their AI assistant to weigh in on that question 🙂

PortfolioPilot AI Assistant v1.3 explaining what it is

On Passiv, the data provided by PortfolioPilot is limited to a portfolio score (out of 1000) and a “Forecasted Return” metric. The Global Predictions/PortfolioPilot assessments for my portfolio as presented on the Passiv dashboard are depicted below.

Global Predictions/ Portfolio Pilot’s scoring of my portfolio, as depicted on the Passiv dashboard23

When I headed over to the PortfolioPilot website, I decided to set up an account and take a closer look.

After an initial set of questions to help figure out my risk profile, I was able to enter my entire portfolio manually, since it’s down to just 12 holdings these days. Pro tip: this is a US tool, so if you enter Canadian stocks/ETF, you have to add “.TO” to the name of the holding in question, e.g. XGRO.TO not just “XGRO”.

So once I did that, it spat out all kinds of pretty data. I do like the visualization per ETF held…this one is showing 3 month returns per ETF. Whether or not it’s including dividend payouts is not known.

3 month return of ETFs held in my retirement portfolio

It also gave me a little more insight into my portfolio score4:

Portfolio Score of my retirement holdings, per PortfolioPilot

This view reminds me of how QTrade does their portfolio assessments, something I thought was a plus of that provider. The downside protection warning indicated that I have too much invested in too few holdings, but since I’m on the free version, no further insight was provided. Both AOA and XGRO are tilted towards large US stocks…I suppose my Magnificent Seven holdings are a non-trivial part of the overall portfolio as a result, but I wasn’t able to delve further into this warning. That’s what you get for paying nothing, I suppose.

So some nice stuff here, nice visualizations, customized news based on what’s in your portfolio, all good. But there are some problems I see with their data.

Example one:

PortfolioPilot Asset class view: 35% “unknown”? Blind spot for Canadian ETFs, maybe?

The asset breakdown is very detailed, which I like, but at 35% “unknown”, it’s kinda useless. No way I can see to figure out what ETFs are causing it trouble. Guess I’ll see what support has to say.

They have specific recommendations, which I also like, but again, I see issues:

PortfolioPilot suggested actions

So here, my issue is with action #2. It was recommending replacing XEQT (an ETF all-star) with VE.

Now, setting aside for a moment that VE and XEQT are pretty different in terms of what they hold, (to start, VE has no Canadian or Far East exposure), the REASON the suggestion was made was to save on management fees. PortfolioPilot claimed that VE attracted no fees, making me a sucker for paying 0.20% to hold XEQT. A quick look at the VE page dispelled that idea immediately — the MER is 0.22%. Following their advice would have led me to pay MORE in fees, not less. Shrug.

Anyway, I spent all of 30 minutes with this tool, and although it shows promise, some of the errors I spotted do not fill me with confidence in recommending it to others.

Anyone out there using it? Got other thoughts? Let me know at comments@moneyengineer.ca!

  1. But per some Reddit threads I have seen, users with more assets with Questrade may get it anyway. I await some sort of official communication before commenting further. As of right now, I still seem to have full access to the tool. ↩︎
  2. I dunno, 95th percentile seems “Excellent” to me.
    ↩︎
  3. Not really sure how to interpret that. Does that mean between 8% and 10% annual return, or does it mean -1% to 19% annual return? I would tend to believe the latter, since that’s more in line with an 80% equity portfolio, but no explanation is offered… ↩︎
  4. I suppose my score is a bit higher because it also includes my remaining QTrade holdings, which Passiv doesn’t support. Or maybe not. ↩︎