EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO
EACC.NEO (Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF) and ZPH.TO (BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. EACC.NEO is passively managed, while ZPH.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, EACC.NEO returned 21.41% vs 7.79% for ZPH.TO. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EACC.NEO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ZPH.TO.
Performance
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EACC.NEO achieves a 11.21% return, which is significantly higher than ZPH.TO's 2.20% return.
EACC.NEO
- 1D
- 1.45%
- 1M
- 0.22%
- 6M
- 8.76%
- YTD
- 11.21%
- 1Y
- 21.41%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 14.13%
ZPH.TO
- 1D
- 0.29%
- 1M
- 1.99%
- 6M
- 4.02%
- YTD
- 2.20%
- 1Y
- 7.79%
- 3Y*
- 7.64%
- 5Y*
- 5.68%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 4.32%
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
EACC.NEO Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF | 11.21% | 18.86% | 0.72% |
ZPH.TO BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF | 2.20% | 9.47% | 1.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between EACC.NEO and ZPH.TO is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2024 | 0.42 |
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
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO — Risk / Return Rank
EACC.NEO
ZPH.TO
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF (EACC.NEO) and BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF (ZPH.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| EACC.NEO | ZPH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.22 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.91 | 1.29 | +0.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.42 | 4.86 | +1.56 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EACC.NEO drawdown since its inception was -13.35%, smaller than the maximum ZPH.TO drawdown of -33.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EACC.NEO and ZPH.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EACC.NEO | ZPH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.35% | -33.38% | +20.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.30% | -6.07% | -5.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -11.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -18.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.26% | -0.43% | -2.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.10% | -4.22% | +2.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.35% | 1.61% | +1.74% |
Volatility
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO - Volatility Comparison
Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF (EACC.NEO) has a higher volatility of 4.69% compared to BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF (ZPH.TO) at 2.39%. This indicates that EACC.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZPH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EACC.NEO | ZPH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.69% | 2.39% | +2.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.03% | 5.56% | +6.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.50% | 6.60% | +8.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.31% | 11.18% | +4.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.31% | 12.59% | +2.72% |
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
EACC.NEO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than ZPH.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
EACC.NEO vs. ZPH.TO - Dividend Comparison
EACC.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.32%, less than ZPH.TO's 10.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EACC.NEO Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF | 7.32% | 7.55% | 5.12% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZPH.TO BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF | 10.37% | 10.06% | 9.95% | 8.18% | 8.83% | 7.27% | 7.67% | 7.26% | 6.98% | 5.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EACC.NEO and ZPH.TO have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EACC.NEO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EACC.NEO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ZPH.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EACC.NEO and 0.65% for ZPH.TO.
Find the right allocation for EACC.NEO and ZPH.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