NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO (Ninepoint Energy ETF) and ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NNRG.NEO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index, while ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO. NNRG.NEO is passively managed, while ZLB.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, NNRG.NEO returned 34.11%/yr vs 11.81%/yr for ZLB.TO. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NNRG.NEO charges 1.79%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ZLB.TO.
Performance
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NNRG.NEO achieves a 47.23% return, which is significantly higher than ZLB.TO's 4.04% return.
NNRG.NEO
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- 4.71%
- YTD
- 47.23%
- 6M
- 39.62%
- 1Y
- 70.90%
- 3Y*
- 26.98%
- 5Y*
- 34.11%
- 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%
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF | 47.23% | 19.14% | 13.26% | -4.21% | 66.18% | 55.91% |
ZLB.TO BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF | 4.04% | 25.29% | 15.31% | 9.41% | -0.35% | 9.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between NNRG.NEO and ZLB.TO is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2021 | 0.15 |
The correlation between NNRG.NEO and ZLB.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to 0.15 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NNRG.NEO
ZLB.TO
Energy
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Energy
NNRG.NEO
ZLB.TO
-
Basic Materials
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Communication Services
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Consumer Cyclical
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Consumer Defensive
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Financial Services
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Healthcare
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
-
Industrials
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Real Estate
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Technology
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
Utilities
NNRG.NEO
-
ZLB.TO
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
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO — Risk / Return Rank
NNRG.NEO
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) 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.
| NNRG.NEO | ZLB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.36 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.60 | 3.08 | +3.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.91 | 11.43 | +2.47 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NNRG.NEO | ZLB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.92 | 1.99 | +0.93 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.99 | 1.26 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.89 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.08 | 1.15 | -0.07 |
Drawdowns
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NNRG.NEO drawdown since its inception was -35.78%, which is greater than ZLB.TO's maximum drawdown of -33.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NNRG.NEO and ZLB.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NNRG.NEO | ZLB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.78% | -33.96% | -1.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.84% | -5.36% | -5.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.52% | -8.01% | -15.51% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.78% | -13.00% | -22.78% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.63% | -0.84% | -2.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.58% | -2.46% | -7.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.14% | 1.44% | +3.70% |
Volatility
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Volatility Comparison
Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) has a higher volatility of 10.30% compared to BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) at 2.57%. This indicates that NNRG.NEO'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NNRG.NEO | ZLB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.30% | 2.57% | +7.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.65% | 6.39% | +14.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.55% | 8.31% | +16.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.60% | 9.44% | +25.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.55% | 12.15% | +22.40% |
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
NNRG.NEO has a 1.79% expense ratio, which is higher than ZLB.TO's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
NNRG.NEO vs. ZLB.TO - Dividend Comparison
NNRG.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than ZLB.TO's 1.87% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF | 0.51% | 0.37% | 0.39% | 0.38% | 9.08% | 1.92% | 0.00% | 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
NNRG.NEO and ZLB.TO have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZLB.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZLB.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 1.79% for NNRG.NEO.
NNRG.NEO is categorized as Energy Equities, while ZLB.TO is Canada Equities. They also come from different issuers: Ninepoint and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.79% for NNRG.NEO and 0.39% for ZLB.TO.
Find the right allocation for NNRG.NEO and ZLB.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