GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GBAL.TO (iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio) and ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GBAL.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by iShares, while ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GBAL.TO returned 9.04%/yr vs 11.81%/yr for ZLB.TO. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GBAL.TO charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ZLB.TO.

Performance

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO) and BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GBAL.TO achieves a 9.39% return, which is significantly higher than ZLB.TO's 4.04% return.

GBAL.TO

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 5.46%
• YTD: 9.39%
• 6M: 7.35%
• 1Y: 18.03%
• 3Y*: 15.66%
• 5Y*: 9.04%
• 10Y*: —

ZLB.TO

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: 1.80%
• YTD: 4.04%
• 6M: 4.91%
• 1Y: 16.44%
• 3Y*: 15.72%
• 5Y*: 11.81%
• 10Y*: 10.79%

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

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GBAL.TO iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio	9.39%	11.77%	17.38%	14.48%	-11.94%	11.32%	6.10%
ZLB.TO BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF	4.04%	25.29%	15.31%	9.41%	-0.35%	22.93%	6.88%

Correlation

The correlation between GBAL.TO and ZLB.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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2020	0.46

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GBAL.TO	ZLB.TO
Technology	22.2%	2.0%
Financial Services	18.1%	23.7%
Industrials	5.4%	9.8%
Basic Materials	4.5%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	3.1%	8.6%
Healthcare	2.9%	-
Real Estate	1.9%	4.3%
Communication Services	1.8%	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	1.7%	18.2%
Utilities	0.6%	17.6%
Energy	0.0%	-

Return for Risk

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GBAL.TO

GBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 60
GBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
GBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
GBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 61
GBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
GBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

ZLB.TO

ZLB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 62
ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
ZLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
ZLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
ZLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
ZLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO) and BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.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.

	GBAL.TO	ZLB.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	1.99	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.97	-0.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.36	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.83	3.08	-0.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.25	11.43	-0.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GBAL.TO and ZLB.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GBAL.TO	ZLB.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.92	1.99	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	1.26	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.89	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.03	1.15	-0.11

Drawdowns

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBAL.TO drawdown since its inception was -18.92%, smaller than the maximum ZLB.TO drawdown of -33.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBAL.TO and ZLB.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	GBAL.TO	ZLB.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.92%	-33.96%	+15.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.40%	-5.36%	-1.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.24%	-8.01%	-2.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.92%	-13.00%	-5.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.08%	-0.84%	+0.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.30%	-2.46%	-1.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.61%	1.44%	+0.17%

Volatility

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio (GBAL.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.19% compared to BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) at 2.57%. This indicates that GBAL.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZLB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GBAL.TO	ZLB.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.19%	2.57%	+0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.87%	6.39%	+1.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.42%	8.31%	+1.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.70%	9.44%	+0.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.53%	12.15%	-2.62%

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GBAL.TO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ZLB.TO's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

GBAL.TO vs. ZLB.TO - Dividend Comparison

GBAL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, less than ZLB.TO's 1.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GBAL.TO iShares ESG Balanced ETF Portfolio	1.71%	1.83%	1.84%	2.40%	1.87%	1.43%	0.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ZLB.TO BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF	1.87%	1.93%	2.37%	2.67%	2.66%	2.39%	2.83%	2.44%	2.76%	2.52%	2.94%	2.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GBAL.TO and ZLB.TO in my portfolio?

GBAL.TO and ZLB.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.

Which ETF is better, GBAL.TO or ZLB.TO?

On fees, GBAL.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GBAL.TO or ZLB.TO?

GBAL.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ZLB.TO.

What is the main difference between GBAL.TO and ZLB.TO?

GBAL.TO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while ZLB.TO is Canada Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GBAL.TO and 0.39% for ZLB.TO.