MARO vs. ZWB.TO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MARO (YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF) and ZWB.TO (BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MARO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax, while ZWB.TO is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by BMO. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MARO returned -20.45% vs 56.65% for ZWB.TO. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MARO charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for ZWB.TO.

Performance

MARO vs. ZWB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) and BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

MARO is traded in USD, while ZWB.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the ZWB.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MARO achieves a 29.91% return, which is significantly higher than ZWB.TO's 22.09% return.

MARO

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 3.08%
• YTD: 29.91%
• 6M: 21.37%
• 1Y: -20.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZWB.TO

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 4.60%
• YTD: 22.09%
• 6M: 22.38%
• 1Y: 56.65%
• 3Y*: 27.11%
• 5Y*: 12.55%
• 10Y*: 12.22%

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

MARO vs. ZWB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MARO YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF	29.91%	-48.05%	-23.63%
ZWB.TO BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF	22.09%	41.36%	-2.92%

Correlation

The correlation between MARO and ZWB.TO is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2024	0.24

Return for Risk

MARO vs. ZWB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MARO

MARO Risk / Return Rank: 7
MARO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
MARO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
MARO Omega Ratio Rank: 7
MARO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
MARO Martin Ratio Rank: 6

ZWB.TO

ZWB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 97
ZWB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
ZWB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ZWB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ZWB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
ZWB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) 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.

	MARO	ZWB.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.33	4.68	-5.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.08	6.27	-6.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.85	-0.86
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.31	6.37	-6.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.52	28.81	-29.33

MARO vs. ZWB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MARO Sharpe Ratio is -0.33, which is lower than the ZWB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 4.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MARO 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.

Drawdowns

MARO vs. ZWB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MARO drawdown since its inception was -71.75%, which is greater than ZWB.TO's maximum drawdown of -44.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARO and ZWB.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MARO	ZWB.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.75%	-44.77%	-26.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.51%	-8.94%	-56.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.62%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.47%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.50%	0.00%	-50.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.26%	-9.34%	-32.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	39.72%	1.97%	+37.75%

Volatility

MARO vs. ZWB.TO - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) has a higher volatility of 16.27% compared to BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.TO) at 3.28%. This indicates that MARO'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.

Volatility by Period

	MARO	ZWB.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.27%	3.28%	+12.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	47.21%	10.32%	+36.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	62.60%	12.17%	+50.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	65.24%	14.43%	+50.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	65.24%	17.23%	+48.01%

MARO vs. ZWB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MARO has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than ZWB.TO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

MARO vs. ZWB.TO - Dividend Comparison

MARO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 177.57%, more than ZWB.TO's 4.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MARO YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF	177.57%	277.68%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both MARO and ZWB.TO in my portfolio?

MARO and ZWB.TO have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MARO or ZWB.TO?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, MARO or ZWB.TO?

ZWB.TO is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for MARO.

What is the main difference between MARO and ZWB.TO?

MARO is categorized as Derivative Income, while ZWB.TO is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MARO and 0.72% for ZWB.TO.