CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO
CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) and ZDY.TO (BMO US Dividend ETF (CAD)) are both exchange-traded funds - CLU.NEO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI US 1000 Canadian Dollar Hedged Index, while ZDY.TO is a Dividend fund actively managed by BMO. CLU.NEO is passively managed, while ZDY.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CLU.NEO returned 11.02%/yr vs 11.12%/yr for ZDY.TO. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CLU.NEO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZDY.TO.
Performance
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLU.NEO achieves a 8.69% return, which is significantly lower than ZDY.TO's 18.38% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CLU.NEO having a 11.02% annualized return and ZDY.TO not far ahead at 11.12%.
CLU.NEO
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.57%
- YTD
- 8.69%
- 6M
- 10.48%
- 1Y
- 24.65%
- 3Y*
- 16.95%
- 5Y*
- 9.30%
- 10Y*
- 11.02%
ZDY.TO
- 1D
- 0.21%
- 1M
- 7.80%
- YTD
- 18.38%
- 6M
- 10.66%
- 1Y
- 27.52%
- 3Y*
- 18.43%
- 5Y*
- 13.60%
- 10Y*
- 11.12%
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 8.69% | 15.20% | 14.82% | 13.13% | -9.37% | 31.13% | 3.57% | 25.41% | -11.16% | 14.83% |
ZDY.TO BMO US Dividend ETF (CAD) | 18.38% | 4.45% | 26.22% | 4.58% | 1.64% | 22.92% | -5.18% | 16.96% | 3.22% | 6.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLU.NEO and ZDY.TO is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2013 | 0.53 |
The correlation between CLU.NEO and ZDY.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CLU.NEO
ZDY.TO
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) and BMO US Dividend ETF (CAD) (ZDY.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.
| CLU.NEO | ZDY.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.45 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.86 | 4.08 | -0.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.84 | 14.10 | +0.74 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CLU.NEO | ZDY.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.50 | 2.34 | +0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 | 1.12 | -0.48 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | 0.74 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.61 | 0.96 | -0.34 |
Drawdowns
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLU.NEO drawdown since its inception was -39.93%, which is greater than ZDY.TO's maximum drawdown of -33.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLU.NEO and ZDY.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLU.NEO | ZDY.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.93% | -33.01% | -6.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.55% | -6.78% | +0.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.57% | -15.32% | -1.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.66% | -15.32% | -5.34% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.93% | -33.01% | -6.92% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.70% | 0.00% | -0.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.74% | -3.30% | -1.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.70% | 1.96% | -0.26% |
Volatility
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) is 2.30%, while BMO US Dividend ETF (CAD) (ZDY.TO) has a volatility of 4.61%. This indicates that CLU.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZDY.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLU.NEO | ZDY.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.30% | 4.61% | -2.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.24% | 9.85% | -2.61% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.11% | 11.83% | -1.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.54% | 12.17% | +2.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.08% | 15.18% | +2.90% |
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLU.NEO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than ZDY.TO's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLU.NEO vs. ZDY.TO - Dividend Comparison
CLU.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, less than ZDY.TO's 1.45% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 1.20% | 1.31% | 1.32% | 1.35% | 1.63% | 1.19% | 1.66% | 1.46% | 1.77% | 1.46% | 1.63% | 1.87% |
ZDY.TO BMO US Dividend ETF (CAD) | 1.45% | 1.72% | 1.97% | 2.43% | 2.48% | 2.33% | 3.65% | 3.02% | 2.80% | 2.63% | 2.46% | 2.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLU.NEO and ZDY.TO have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZDY.TO is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZDY.TO is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
CLU.NEO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ZDY.TO is Dividend. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CLU.NEO and 0.30% for ZDY.TO.
Find the right allocation for CLU.NEO and ZDY.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