FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FBAL.NEO (Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF) and ZGRO.TO (BMO Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBAL.NEO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Fidelity, while ZGRO.TO is a Global Allocation fund actively managed by BMO. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FBAL.NEO returned 10.06%/yr vs 15.63%/yr for ZGRO.TO. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FBAL.NEO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for ZGRO.TO.

Performance

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO) and BMO Growth ETF (ZGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBAL.NEO achieves a 7.72% return, which is significantly lower than ZGRO.TO's 10.99% return.

FBAL.NEO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.85%
• YTD: 7.72%
• 6M: 7.14%
• 1Y: 16.85%
• 3Y*: 16.58%
• 5Y*: 10.06%
• 10Y*: —

ZGRO.TO

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 1.20%
• YTD: 10.99%
• 6M: 10.45%
• 1Y: 25.69%
• 3Y*: 22.99%
• 5Y*: 15.63%
• 10Y*: —

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

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF	7.72%	12.92%	19.42%	13.96%	-9.60%	11.51%
ZGRO.TO BMO Growth ETF	10.99%	18.65%	25.70%	20.36%	-5.92%	17.70%

Correlation

The correlation between FBAL.NEO and ZGRO.TO is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2021	0.78

The correlation between FBAL.NEO and ZGRO.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBAL.NEO

FBAL.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 72
FBAL.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
FBAL.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
FBAL.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 76
FBAL.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
FBAL.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 71

ZGRO.TO

ZGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 81
ZGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
ZGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
ZGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 79
ZGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
ZGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO) and BMO Growth ETF (ZGRO.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.

	FBAL.NEO	ZGRO.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	2.19	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	3.07	-0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.41	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.74	3.75	-1.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.48	14.66	-3.18

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBAL.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the ZGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBAL.NEO and ZGRO.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

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBAL.NEO drawdown since its inception was -16.23%, smaller than the maximum ZGRO.TO drawdown of -24.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBAL.NEO and ZGRO.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBAL.NEO	ZGRO.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.23%	-24.67%	+8.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.17%	-6.87%	+0.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.29%	-11.60%	+3.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.23%	-16.21%	-0.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	-2.37%	+1.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.23%	-2.49%	-0.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.47%	1.76%	-0.29%

Volatility

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO) is 2.63%, while BMO Growth ETF (ZGRO.TO) has a volatility of 5.05%. This indicates that FBAL.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZGRO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBAL.NEO	ZGRO.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.63%	5.05%	-2.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.71%	9.90%	-3.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.15%	11.81%	-3.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.57%	11.18%	-2.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.52%	13.19%	-4.67%

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBAL.NEO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than ZGRO.TO's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBAL.NEO vs. ZGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

FBAL.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, less than ZGRO.TO's 2.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF	1.50%	1.61%	1.42%	1.71%	1.57%	1.08%	0.00%	0.00%
ZGRO.TO BMO Growth ETF	2.24%	3.38%	5.76%	6.81%	7.63%	6.65%	7.47%	6.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBAL.NEO and ZGRO.TO in my portfolio?

FBAL.NEO and ZGRO.TO have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FBAL.NEO or ZGRO.TO?

On fees, ZGRO.TO is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBAL.NEO or ZGRO.TO?

ZGRO.TO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for FBAL.NEO.

What is the main difference between FBAL.NEO and ZGRO.TO?

FBAL.NEO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while ZGRO.TO is Global Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for FBAL.NEO and 0.18% for ZGRO.TO.