ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO

Last updated Jul 1, 2026

ESGB.TO (BMO ESG Corporate Bond Index ETF) and ZBBB.TO (BMO BBB Corporate Bond Index ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds from BMO. Over the past 5 years, ESGB.TO returned 2.22%/yr vs 3.08%/yr for ZBBB.TO. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO ESG Corporate Bond Index ETF (ESGB.TO) and BMO BBB Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZBBB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESGB.TO achieves a 2.00% return, which is significantly higher than ZBBB.TO's 1.74% return.

ESGB.TO

• 1D: -0.64%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 2.00%
• 6M: 1.89%
• 1Y: 4.32%
• 3Y*: 6.14%
• 5Y*: 2.22%
• 10Y*: —

ZBBB.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.24%
• YTD: 1.74%
• 6M: 1.78%
• 1Y: 4.36%
• 3Y*: 6.94%
• 5Y*: 3.08%
• 10Y*: —

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

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ESGB.TO BMO ESG Corporate Bond Index ETF	2.00%	4.18%	6.92%	7.89%	-9.31%	-2.24%	5.47%
ZBBB.TO BMO BBB Corporate Bond Index ETF	1.74%	4.83%	8.00%	5.61%	-4.43%	-1.12%	6.72%

Correlation

The correlation between ESGB.TO and ZBBB.TO is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.37
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2020	0.31

Return for Risk

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESGB.TO

ESGB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 36
ESGB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
ESGB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
ESGB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 33
ESGB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
ESGB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 38

ZBBB.TO

ZBBB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 55
ZBBB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
ZBBB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
ZBBB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
ZBBB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
ZBBB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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.

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO ESG Corporate Bond Index ETF (ESGB.TO) and BMO BBB Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZBBB.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.

	ESGB.TO	ZBBB.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	1.52	-0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.59	2.36	-0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.34	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.76	2.40	-0.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.17	6.77	-1.59

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESGB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is comparable to the ZBBB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESGB.TO and ZBBB.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.

Drawdowns

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESGB.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.18%, which is greater than ZBBB.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESGB.TO and ZBBB.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESGB.TO	ZBBB.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.18%	-11.55%	-3.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.47%	-1.97%	-0.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-2.72%	-1.97%	-0.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.96%	-11.23%	-2.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.64%	0.00%	-0.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.26%	-2.65%	-1.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.84%	0.70%	+0.14%

Volatility

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO ESG Corporate Bond Index ETF (ESGB.TO) has a higher volatility of 1.55% compared to BMO BBB Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZBBB.TO) at 0.66%. This indicates that ESGB.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZBBB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ESGB.TO	ZBBB.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.55%	0.66%	+0.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.02%	1.98%	+1.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.00%	3.13%	+0.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.39%	4.51%	+0.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.99%	5.84%	+0.15%

Dividends

ESGB.TO vs. ZBBB.TO - Dividend Comparison

ESGB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.99%, more than ZBBB.TO's 3.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ESGB.TO BMO ESG Corporate Bond Index ETF	3.99%	3.82%	3.52%	3.56%	3.39%	2.98%	2.83%
ZBBB.TO BMO BBB Corporate Bond Index ETF	3.18%	4.11%	3.72%	3.47%	4.42%	3.23%	3.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESGB.TO and ZBBB.TO in my portfolio?

ESGB.TO and ZBBB.TO have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.