I'd bet the health outcomes in Canada (life expectancy, infant mortality, cancer survival rates, etc) are more evenly distributed across the population given that everyone has access to roughly the same level of care. The outcomes in US are far more distributed (I saw a study once where the life expectancy for high earners is as much as 10 years higher than poor people). On average, I think Canada's outcomes are probably "essentially equivalent (or even better) than ours. But most people don't experience "average" healthcare. For people with access to good healthcare through their employer, the Canada system would be a downgrade in terms of wait times for care. The cost would be less -- although the patient might not necessarily see this since so much of the cost is borne by the employer.

I'm all for fixing our system... but if you make it a worse experience for half the country while lowering the cost (that half the country only pays a small part of) and keeping "average" health outcomes the same, you're going to fail. That's why a system like Germany or France is a much better model for the US than is Canada's system.