ACWV vs. ZLB.TO

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) and ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ACWV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC World Minimum Volatility (USD), while ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO. ACWV is passively managed, while ZLB.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, ACWV returned 7.26%/yr vs 9.42%/yr for ZLB.TO. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ACWV charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ZLB.TO.

Performance

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

ACWV is traded in USD, while ZLB.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the ZLB.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACWV achieves a 1.59% return, which is significantly lower than ZLB.TO's 2.14% return. Over the past 10 years, ACWV has underperformed ZLB.TO with an annualized return of 7.26%, while ZLB.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 9.42% annualized return.

ACWV

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -0.30%
• YTD: 1.59%
• 6M: 2.50%
• 1Y: 3.85%
• 3Y*: 9.71%
• 5Y*: 5.30%
• 10Y*: 7.26%

ZLB.TO

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: -0.55%
• YTD: 2.14%
• 6M: 0.70%
• 1Y: 10.48%
• 3Y*: 13.02%
• 5Y*: 7.91%
• 10Y*: 9.42%

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

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.59%	11.04%	11.38%	8.23%	-10.36%	13.97%	3.04%	21.04%	-1.42%	18.57%
ZLB.TO BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF	2.08%	26.16%	6.31%	12.07%	-6.29%	22.99%	3.98%	27.16%	-10.30%	19.18%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWV and ZLB.TO is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2011	0.47

The correlation between ACWV and ZLB.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ACWV	ZLB.TO
Technology	22.6%	1.9%
Healthcare	13.2%	-
Financial Services	13.1%	23.9%
Communication Services	12.2%	9.3%
Consumer Defensive	10.3%	18.3%
Industrials	7.9%	10.0%
Utilities	7.8%	17.6%
Consumer Cyclical	5.1%	8.5%
Energy	3.4%	-
Basic Materials	1.8%	6.2%
Real Estate	0.8%	4.3%

Return for Risk

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 17
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 16
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 19

ZLB.TO

ZLB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 45
ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
ZLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
ZLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 45
ZLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
ZLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.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.

	ACWV	ZLB.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	1.05	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.74	1.46	-0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.20	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.61	1.72	-1.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.87	4.69	-2.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWV Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWV and ZLB.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

	ACWV	ZLB.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	1.05	-0.56
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52	0.68	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59	0.68	-0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.75	-0.05

Drawdowns

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWV drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, smaller than the maximum ZLB.TO drawdown of -39.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWV and ZLB.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACWV	ZLB.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.82%	-39.55%	+10.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.37%	-6.13%	-0.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.56%	-12.27%	+4.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.14%	-20.63%	+2.49%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.82%	-39.55%	+10.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.64%	-2.58%	-1.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.11%	-4.09%	+0.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.06%	2.24%	-0.18%

Volatility

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) is 2.09%, while BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) has a volatility of 2.82%. This indicates that ACWV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZLB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACWV	ZLB.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.09%	2.82%	-0.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.66%	8.11%	-2.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.79%	10.02%	-2.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.24%	11.65%	-1.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.31%	13.91%	-1.60%

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than ZLB.TO's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACWV vs. ZLB.TO - Dividend Comparison

ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.05%, more than ZLB.TO's 1.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	2.05%	2.09%	2.33%	2.41%	2.18%	1.92%	1.77%	2.54%	2.32%	2.04%	2.56%	2.28%
ZLB.TO BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF	1.91%	1.99%	2.37%	2.67%	2.66%	2.39%	2.83%	2.44%	2.76%	2.55%	2.94%	2.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACWV and ZLB.TO in my portfolio?

ACWV and ZLB.TO have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ACWV or ZLB.TO?

On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACWV or ZLB.TO?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ZLB.TO.

What is the main difference between ACWV and ZLB.TO?

ACWV is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ZLB.TO is Canada Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACWV and 0.39% for ZLB.TO.