PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio (GGRO.TO) and BMO Growth ETF (ZGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GGRO.TO achieves a 13.25% return, which is significantly higher than ZGRO.TO's 11.48% return.


GGRO.TO

1D
-0.24%
1M
0.08%
6M
10.59%
YTD
13.25%
1Y
20.65%
3Y*
17.64%
5Y*
10.78%
10Y*

ZGRO.TO

1D
0.10%
1M
-1.94%
6M
8.38%
YTD
11.48%
1Y
23.24%
3Y*
21.31%
5Y*
15.20%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
GGRO.TO
iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio
13.25%14.25%20.49%19.17%-14.12%15.53%7.20%
ZGRO.TO
BMO Growth ETF
11.48%18.65%25.70%20.36%-5.92%20.50%10.44%

Correlation

The correlation between GGRO.TO and ZGRO.TO is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.72

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.73

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2020

0.68

The correlation between GGRO.TO and ZGRO.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.73 - 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

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GGRO.TO
GGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
GGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
GGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
GGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
GGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

ZGRO.TO
ZGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
ZGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio (GGRO.TO) 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.


GGRO.TOZGRO.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.35

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.68

3.40

-0.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.54

12.98

-2.43

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the ZGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GGRO.TO 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GGRO.TO drawdown since its inception was -22.12%, smaller than the maximum ZGRO.TO drawdown of -24.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GGRO.TO and ZGRO.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GGRO.TOZGRO.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.12%

-24.67%

+2.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.74%

-6.87%

-0.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.77%

-11.60%

-2.17%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.12%

-16.21%

-5.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.46%

-1.94%

+0.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.15%

-2.49%

-2.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.96%

1.80%

+0.16%

Volatility

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio (GGRO.TO) and BMO Growth ETF (ZGRO.TO) have volatilities of 3.79% and 3.69%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GGRO.TOZGRO.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.79%

3.69%

+0.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.32%

10.20%

+0.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.67%

12.03%

+0.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.13%

11.23%

+3.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.30%

13.19%

+3.11%

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GGRO.TO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than ZGRO.TO's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

GGRO.TO vs. ZGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

GGRO.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, less than ZGRO.TO's 1.43% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
GGRO.TO
iShares ESG Growth ETF Portfolio
1.41%1.52%1.63%1.89%1.69%1.44%0.83%0.00%
ZGRO.TO
BMO Growth ETF
1.43%3.38%5.76%6.81%7.63%6.65%7.47%6.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


GGRO.TO and ZGRO.TO have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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.

ZGRO.TO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for GGRO.TO.

GGRO.TO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while ZGRO.TO is Global Allocation. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for GGRO.TO and 0.18% for ZGRO.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GGRO.TO and ZGRO.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