PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

HBF.TO (Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged)) and ZWB.TO (BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HBF.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Harvest Portfolios Group, while ZWB.TO is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by BMO. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, HBF.TO returned 11.11%/yr vs 13.33%/yr for ZWB.TO. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HBF.TO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for ZWB.TO.

Performance

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged) (HBF.TO) and BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HBF.TO achieves a 5.63% return, which is significantly lower than ZWB.TO's 26.23% return. Over the past 10 years, HBF.TO has underperformed ZWB.TO with an annualized return of 11.11%, while ZWB.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 13.33% annualized return.

HBF.TO

1D
-0.18%
1M
-1.40%
YTD
5.63%
6M
5.39%
1Y
21.17%
3Y*
13.46%
5Y*
7.40%
10Y*
11.11%

ZWB.TO

1D
0.39%
1M
7.50%
YTD
26.23%
6M
26.02%
1Y
61.42%
3Y*
30.29%
5Y*
15.76%
10Y*
13.33%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HBF.TO
Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged)		5.63%15.51%13.12%11.23%-14.97%21.90%11.44%26.02%-4.69%18.30%
ZWB.TO
BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF		26.23%34.91%19.41%6.67%-11.00%30.81%1.68%14.32%-8.08%11.52%

Correlation

The correlation between HBF.TO and ZWB.TO is 0.50, 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

0.50

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

0.54

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

0.63

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2014

0.54

The correlation between HBF.TO and ZWB.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (1 year) to 0.63 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HBF.TO
ZWB.TO

Technology

33.6%

-

Financial Services

18.9%
100.0%

Consumer Defensive

13.8%

-

Communication Services

9.9%

-

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%

-

Industrials

5.1%

-

Healthcare

4.9%

-

Energy

4.5%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

HBF.TO
33.6%
ZWB.TO

-

Financial Services

HBF.TO
18.9%
ZWB.TO
100.0%

Consumer Defensive

HBF.TO
13.8%
ZWB.TO

-

Communication Services

HBF.TO
9.9%
ZWB.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

HBF.TO
9.4%
ZWB.TO

-

Industrials

HBF.TO
5.1%
ZWB.TO

-

Healthcare

HBF.TO
4.9%
ZWB.TO

-

Energy

HBF.TO
4.5%
ZWB.TO

-

Basic Materials

HBF.TO

-

ZWB.TO

-

Real Estate

HBF.TO

-

ZWB.TO

-

Utilities

HBF.TO

-

ZWB.TO

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged)

BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF

Often compared with HBF.TO:
HBF.TO vs. YGOG.NEOHBF.TO vs. XTOT.TOHBF.TO vs. RUD.TOHBF.TO vs. HPYE.TOHBF.TO vs. HPYB.TOHBF.TO vs. FLUS.TOHBF.TO vs. METE.TO
Often compared with ZWB.TO:
ZWB.TO vs. ZEB.TOZWB.TO vs. ZWC.TOZWB.TO vs. VDY.TOZWB.TO vs. VFV.TOZWB.TO vs. XDIV.TOZWB.TO vs. RBNK.TOZWB.TO vs. SRU-UN.TO

Return for Risk

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HBF.TO
HBF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
HBF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HBF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
HBF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
HBF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
HBF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO
ZWB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
ZWB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged) (HBF.TO) and BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.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.

HBF.TOZWB.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.99
5.36

-3.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.82
7.28

-4.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

2.02

-0.66

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.73

7.89

-5.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.70

35.44

-24.74

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HBF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.99, which is lower than the ZWB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 5.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HBF.TO and ZWB.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

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HBF.TO drawdown since its inception was -35.27%, smaller than the maximum ZWB.TO drawdown of -39.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HBF.TO and ZWB.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HBF.TOZWB.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.27%

-39.36%

+4.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.79%

-7.82%

+0.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.25%

-14.05%

-1.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.69%

-25.26%

+1.57%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.27%

-39.36%

+4.09%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.44%

0.00%

-3.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.74%

-5.54%

-1.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.98%

1.74%

+0.24%

Volatility

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Volatility Comparison

Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged) (HBF.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.59% compared to BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.TO) at 3.38%. This indicates that HBF.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZWB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HBF.TOZWB.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.59%

3.38%

+0.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.21%

9.95%

-1.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.70%

11.51%

-0.81%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.09%

12.65%

+1.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.96%

15.67%

+1.29%

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HBF.TO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ZWB.TO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

HBF.TO vs. ZWB.TO - Dividend Comparison

HBF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.59%, more than ZWB.TO's 4.62% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HBF.TO
Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged)		7.59%7.27%7.48%7.52%7.75%5.64%6.36%6.60%7.75%6.88%7.57%7.77%
ZWB.TO
BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF		4.62%5.38%6.66%7.62%7.30%5.46%5.80%5.53%5.59%4.80%5.04%5.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

HBF.TO and ZWB.TO have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ZWB.TO is cheaper at 0.72% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ZWB.TO is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for HBF.TO.

HBF.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while ZWB.TO is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Harvest Portfolios Group and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for HBF.TO and 0.72% for ZWB.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HBF.TO and ZWB.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