PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

PBD.TO (Purpose Total Return Bond Fund) and ZFH.TO (BMO Floating Rate High Yield ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBD.TO is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Purpose Investments Inc., while ZFH.TO is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by BMO. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, PBD.TO returned 2.02%/yr vs 5.44%/yr for ZFH.TO. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PBD.TO charges 0.88%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ZFH.TO.

Performance

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Purpose Total Return Bond Fund (PBD.TO) and BMO Floating Rate High Yield ETF (ZFH.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBD.TO achieves a 0.08% return, which is significantly lower than ZFH.TO's 2.38% return. Over the past 10 years, PBD.TO has underperformed ZFH.TO with an annualized return of 2.02%, while ZFH.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 5.44% annualized return.

PBD.TO

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: -0.98%
• 6M: -0.28%
• YTD: 0.08%
• 1Y: 1.56%
• 3Y*: 4.57%
• 5Y*: 1.51%
• 10Y*: 2.02%
• ALL TIME*: 2.30%

ZFH.TO

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 0.13%
• 6M: 1.77%
• YTD: 2.38%
• 1Y: 4.00%
• 3Y*: 8.44%
• 5Y*: 6.65%
• 10Y*: 5.44%
• ALL TIME*: 5.24%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
PBD.TO Purpose Total Return Bond Fund	CA$31.97K	CA$21.56K	CA$18.22K
ZFH.TO BMO Floating Rate High Yield ETF	CA$246.87K	CA$222.58K	CA$258.07K

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PBD.TO Purpose Total Return Bond Fund	0.08%	4.22%	4.89%	4.80%	-6.19%	0.05%	6.85%	6.23%	-3.51%	2.15%
ZFH.TO BMO Floating Rate High Yield ETF	2.38%	5.61%	11.66%	13.66%	-0.89%	4.79%	-3.87%	11.18%	0.77%	5.45%

Correlation

The correlation between PBD.TO and ZFH.TO is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2014	0.19

Return for Risk

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBD.TO

PBD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 22
PBD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
PBD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
PBD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 19
PBD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
PBD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 29

ZFH.TO

ZFH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 42
ZFH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
ZFH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
ZFH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 46
ZFH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
ZFH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose Total Return Bond Fund (PBD.TO) and BMO Floating Rate High Yield ETF (ZFH.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.

	PBD.TO	ZFH.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.41	1.08	-0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.61	1.54	-0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.21	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.71	1.23	-0.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.55	4.25	-1.70

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.41, which is lower than the ZFH.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBD.TO and ZFH.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

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBD.TO drawdown since its inception was -17.68%, smaller than the maximum ZFH.TO drawdown of -21.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBD.TO and ZFH.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBD.TO	ZFH.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.68%	-21.41%	+3.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.19%	-3.27%	+1.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.41%	-6.39%	+2.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-10.12%	-9.75%	-0.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-17.68%	-21.41%	+3.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.40%	-0.46%	-0.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.34%	-2.04%	-0.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.61%	0.94%	-0.33%

Volatility

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Volatility Comparison

Purpose Total Return Bond Fund (PBD.TO) has a higher volatility of 1.25% compared to BMO Floating Rate High Yield ETF (ZFH.TO) at 0.54%. This indicates that PBD.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZFH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBD.TO	ZFH.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.25%	0.54%	+0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.82%	2.62%	+0.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.85%	3.72%	+0.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.81%	8.09%	-3.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.79%	9.41%	-2.62%

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBD.TO has a 0.88% expense ratio, which is higher than ZFH.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBD.TO vs. ZFH.TO - Dividend Comparison

PBD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%, less than ZFH.TO's 5.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PBD.TO Purpose Total Return Bond Fund	4.36%	4.28%	4.27%	4.25%	3.80%	3.43%	3.32%	3.68%	3.85%	4.50%	3.68%	3.81%
ZFH.TO BMO Floating Rate High Yield ETF	5.18%	5.58%	7.82%	7.07%	4.81%	4.54%	4.57%	4.32%	4.51%	4.64%	4.70%	5.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBD.TO and ZFH.TO in my portfolio?

PBD.TO and ZFH.TO have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PBD.TO or ZFH.TO?

On fees, ZFH.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBD.TO or ZFH.TO?

ZFH.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for PBD.TO.

What is the main difference between PBD.TO and ZFH.TO?

PBD.TO is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while ZFH.TO is High Yield Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments Inc. and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.88% for PBD.TO and 0.40% for ZFH.TO.