FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO
FCUQ.TO (Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF) and ZEQL.TO (BMO MSCI USA Equal Weight Index ETF (CAD Units)) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - FCUQ.TO tracks the Fidelity Canada U.S. High Quality Index while ZEQL.TO tracks the MSCI USA Equal Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FCUQ.TO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for ZEQL.TO.
Performance
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
FCUQ.TO
- 1D
- -0.47%
- 1M
- 8.68%
- YTD
- 7.92%
- 6M
- 4.08%
- 1Y
- 14.01%
- 3Y*
- 18.73%
- 5Y*
- 14.68%
- 10Y*
- —
ZEQL.TO
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 6.20%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
FCUQ.TO Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF | 8.09% |
ZEQL.TO BMO MSCI USA Equal Weight Index ETF (CAD Units) | 7.44% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCUQ.TO and ZEQL.TO is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2026 | 0.74 |
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
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO — Risk / Return Rank
FCUQ.TO
ZEQL.TO
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF (FCUQ.TO) and BMO MSCI USA Equal Weight Index ETF (CAD Units) (ZEQL.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.
| FCUQ.TO | ZEQL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.16 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.79 | — | — |
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
| FCUQ.TO | ZEQL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.23 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.01 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.92 | 2.01 | -1.08 |
Drawdowns
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCUQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.36%, which is greater than ZEQL.TO's maximum drawdown of -6.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCUQ.TO and ZEQL.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCUQ.TO | ZEQL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.36% | -6.12% | -19.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.14% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.48% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.73% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.47% | -0.58% | +0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.29% | -1.69% | -2.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.70% | — | — |
Volatility
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FCUQ.TO | ZEQL.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.37% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.46% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.49% | 12.92% | -1.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.62% | 12.92% | +1.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.31% | 12.92% | +4.39% |
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCUQ.TO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than ZEQL.TO's 0.05% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCUQ.TO vs. ZEQL.TO - Dividend Comparison
FCUQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, more than ZEQL.TO's 0.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCUQ.TO Fidelity U.S. High Quality ETF | 0.67% | 0.73% | 0.77% | 0.88% | 1.04% | 0.79% | 1.15% | 0.82% |
ZEQL.TO BMO MSCI USA Equal Weight Index ETF (CAD Units) | 0.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FCUQ.TO and ZEQL.TO have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZEQL.TO is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZEQL.TO is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for FCUQ.TO.
FCUQ.TO tracks Fidelity Canada U.S. High Quality Index, while ZEQL.TO tracks MSCI USA Equal Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FCUQ.TO and 0.05% for ZEQL.TO.
Find the right allocation for FCUQ.TO and ZEQL.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