RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

RUD.TO (RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)) and ZLH.TO (BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, RUD.TO returned 16.90%/yr vs 7.33%/yr for ZLH.TO. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RUD.TO charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZLH.TO.

Performance

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) and BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUD.TO achieves a 12.40% return, which is significantly higher than ZLH.TO's 9.02% return. Over the past 10 years, RUD.TO has outperformed ZLH.TO with an annualized return of 16.90%, while ZLH.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 7.33% annualized return.

RUD.TO

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 2.85%
• 6M: 9.54%
• YTD: 12.40%
• 1Y: 21.02%
• 3Y*: 18.86%
• 5Y*: 15.69%
• 10Y*: 16.90%

ZLH.TO

• 1D: -1.52%
• 1M: 0.23%
• 6M: 7.96%
• YTD: 9.02%
• 1Y: 9.11%
• 3Y*: 8.51%
• 5Y*: 6.62%
• 10Y*: 7.33%

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

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RUD.TO RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)	12.40%	7.35%	25.76%	23.90%	-15.14%	54.34%	13.61%	25.93%	6.03%	14.39%
ZLH.TO BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF	9.02%	5.90%	10.95%	-2.11%	0.20%	22.07%	2.34%	25.20%	-1.85%	11.93%

Correlation

The correlation between RUD.TO and ZLH.TO is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.29
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2016	0.38

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RUD.TO	ZLH.TO
Technology	31.1%	18.7%
Consumer Cyclical	13.2%	3.2%
Financial Services	12.9%	11.7%
Industrials	8.7%	6.3%
Communication Services	8.4%	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	8.4%	12.4%
Healthcare	8.0%	17.8%
Energy	5.0%	0.7%
Utilities	3.0%	20.7%
Real Estate	0.8%	3.4%
Basic Materials	0.5%	2.2%

Return for Risk

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RUD.TO

RUD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 69
RUD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
RUD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
RUD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
RUD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RUD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 76

ZLH.TO

ZLH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 28
ZLH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
ZLH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
ZLH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 28
ZLH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
ZLH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) and BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.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.

	RUD.TO	ZLH.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	0.85	+0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.35	1.15	+1.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.16	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.18	1.25	+1.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.30	3.02	+8.28

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is higher than the ZLH.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUD.TO and ZLH.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

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RUD.TO drawdown since its inception was -35.99%, which is greater than ZLH.TO's maximum drawdown of -33.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUD.TO and ZLH.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RUD.TO	ZLH.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.99%	-33.34%	-2.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.65%	-7.35%	+0.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.31%	-10.17%	-18.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.31%	-14.66%	-13.65%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.99%	-33.34%	-2.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.87%	-2.18%	+1.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.04%	-3.90%	-6.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.86%	3.03%	-1.17%

Volatility

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD) (RUD.TO) is 3.00%, while BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.TO) has a volatility of 4.33%. This indicates that RUD.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZLH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RUD.TO	ZLH.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.00%	4.33%	-1.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.35%	7.78%	+1.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.42%	10.79%	+1.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.44%	12.27%	+22.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	44.71%	13.84%	+30.87%

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RUD.TO has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than ZLH.TO's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

RUD.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Dividend Comparison

RUD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%, less than ZLH.TO's 1.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RUD.TO RBC Quant U.S. Dividend Leaders ETF (CAD)	1.36%	1.38%	3.43%	5.24%	5.51%	3.38%	5.73%	6.77%	7.06%	6.23%	6.07%	7.42%
ZLH.TO BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF	1.74%	1.92%	2.25%	2.45%	2.12%	1.84%	1.95%	1.55%	2.00%	1.93%	2.02%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RUD.TO and ZLH.TO in my portfolio?

RUD.TO and ZLH.TO have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RUD.TO or ZLH.TO?

On fees, ZLH.TO is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RUD.TO or ZLH.TO?

ZLH.TO is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for RUD.TO.

What is the main difference between RUD.TO and ZLH.TO?

They also come from different issuers: RBC and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for RUD.TO and 0.30% for ZLH.TO.