PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCNS.NEO achieves a 5.61% return, which is significantly lower than ZMI.TO's 10.10% return.


FCNS.NEO

1D
0.47%
1M
-0.08%
6M
3.89%
YTD
5.61%
1Y
11.65%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
11.36%

ZMI.TO

1D
0.60%
1M
0.20%
6M
8.11%
YTD
10.10%
1Y
14.28%
3Y*
12.23%
5Y*
7.59%
10Y*
6.58%
ALL TIME*
6.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$2.87MCA$3.68MCA$3.34M
CA$173.50KCA$284.92KCA$374.43K

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
FCNS.NEO
Fidelity All-in-One Conservative ETF
5.61%9.95%9.08%
ZMI.TO
BMO Monthly Income ETF
10.10%8.04%8.44%

Correlation

The correlation between FCNS.NEO and ZMI.TO is 0.80, 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

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 13, 2024

0.80

The correlation between FCNS.NEO and ZMI.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.80 - 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

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCNS.NEO
FCNS.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
FCNS.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCNS.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCNS.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
FCNS.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCNS.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

ZMI.TO
ZMI.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
ZMI.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZMI.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZMI.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
ZMI.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZMI.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity All-in-One Conservative ETF (FCNS.NEO) and BMO Monthly Income ETF (ZMI.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.


FCNS.NEOZMI.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.28

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.40

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.41

3.02

-0.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.35

9.72

-0.37

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCNS.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the ZMI.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCNS.NEO and ZMI.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCNS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -6.45%, smaller than the maximum ZMI.TO drawdown of -26.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCNS.NEO and ZMI.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCNS.NEOZMI.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-6.45%

-26.64%

+20.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.85%

-4.75%

-0.10%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.80%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.61%

-0.74%

-0.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.89%

-2.07%

+1.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.25%

1.47%

-0.22%

Volatility

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity All-in-One Conservative ETF (FCNS.NEO) has a higher volatility of 2.90% compared to BMO Monthly Income ETF (ZMI.TO) at 1.60%. This indicates that FCNS.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZMI.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCNS.NEOZMI.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.90%

1.60%

+1.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.82%

5.16%

+0.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.88%

7.24%

-0.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.92%

7.45%

-0.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.92%

8.86%

-1.94%

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

FCNS.NEO vs. ZMI.TO - Dividend Comparison

FCNS.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, less than ZMI.TO's 3.86% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCNS.NEO
Fidelity All-in-One Conservative ETF
1.96%2.07%1.71%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ZMI.TO
BMO Monthly Income ETF
3.86%4.67%4.82%5.09%4.63%3.82%4.34%4.37%4.72%4.18%4.01%4.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


FCNS.NEO and ZMI.TO have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

ZMI.TO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for FCNS.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for FCNS.NEO and 0.18% for ZMI.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCNS.NEO and ZMI.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