HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

HXQ.TO (Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF) and ZEB.TO (BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HXQ.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while ZEB.TO is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HXQ.TO returned 22.27%/yr vs 16.60%/yr for ZEB.TO. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.

Performance

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF (HXQ.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HXQ.TO achieves a 19.67% return, which is significantly lower than ZEB.TO's 25.33% return. Over the past 10 years, HXQ.TO has outperformed ZEB.TO with an annualized return of 22.27%, while ZEB.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 16.60% annualized return.

HXQ.TO

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: 3.00%
• YTD: 19.67%
• 6M: 19.59%
• 1Y: 39.46%
• 3Y*: 28.29%
• 5Y*: 19.92%
• 10Y*: 22.27%

ZEB.TO

• 1D: 1.12%
• 1M: 9.87%
• YTD: 25.33%
• 6M: 26.07%
• 1Y: 67.94%
• 3Y*: 34.82%
• 5Y*: 19.53%
• 10Y*: 16.60%

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

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HXQ.TO Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF	19.67%	15.05%	35.98%	51.16%	-27.84%	26.20%	45.58%	32.26%	6.71%	23.12%
ZEB.TO BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	25.33%	43.43%	24.58%	10.87%	-10.38%	39.38%	3.52%	16.06%	-8.85%	14.26%

Correlation

The correlation between HXQ.TO and ZEB.TO is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.38
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2016	0.35

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HXQ.TO	ZEB.TO
Technology	55.9%	-
Communication Services	15.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	13.2%	-
Healthcare	4.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	-
Industrials	3.1%	-
Utilities	1.4%	-
Basic Materials	1.0%	-
Energy	0.5%	-
Financial Services	0.3%	100.0%
Real Estate	0.2%	-

Return for Risk

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HXQ.TO

HXQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 77
HXQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
HXQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
HXQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
HXQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
HXQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 64

ZEB.TO

ZEB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 97
ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
ZEB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ZEB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ZEB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
ZEB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF (HXQ.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.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.

	HXQ.TO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	5.33	-2.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.07	7.18	-4.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.99	-0.57
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	8.09	-4.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.12	34.80	-24.69

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HXQ.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is lower than the ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 5.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HXQ.TO and ZEB.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.

Drawdowns

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HXQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -31.60%, smaller than the maximum ZEB.TO drawdown of -39.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HXQ.TO and ZEB.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HXQ.TO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.60%	-39.69%	+8.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.43%	-8.44%	-3.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.58%	-14.80%	-7.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.60%	-25.97%	-5.63%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.60%	-39.69%	+8.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.58%	0.00%	-2.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.74%	-5.65%	-0.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.91%	1.96%	+1.95%

Volatility

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Volatility Comparison

Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF (HXQ.TO) has a higher volatility of 7.27% compared to BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) at 4.52%. This indicates that HXQ.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZEB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HXQ.TO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.27%	4.52%	+2.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.32%	11.13%	+2.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.70%	12.81%	+3.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.92%	13.55%	+7.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.92%	16.90%	+4.02%

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both HXQ.TO and ZEB.TO have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

HXQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Dividend Comparison

HXQ.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ZEB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HXQ.TO Horizons NASDAQ-100 Index ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ZEB.TO BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	2.41%	2.95%	3.98%	4.75%	4.29%	3.13%	4.15%	3.65%	3.64%	3.02%	3.19%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HXQ.TO and ZEB.TO in my portfolio?

HXQ.TO and ZEB.TO have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HXQ.TO or ZEB.TO?

Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HXQ.TO or ZEB.TO?

HXQ.TO and ZEB.TO have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

What is the main difference between HXQ.TO and ZEB.TO?

HXQ.TO is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while ZEB.TO is Financials Equities. HXQ.TO tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while ZEB.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. They also come from different issuers: Horizons and BMO.