TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TGRO.TO (TD Growth ETF Portfolio) and ZBAL.TO (BMO Balanced ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TGRO.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by TD, while ZBAL.TO is a Global Allocation fund actively managed by BMO. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, TGRO.TO returned 13.26%/yr vs 8.70%/yr for ZBAL.TO. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TGRO.TO charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for ZBAL.TO.

Performance

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in TD Growth ETF Portfolio (TGRO.TO) and BMO Balanced ETF (ZBAL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TGRO.TO achieves a 9.93% return, which is significantly higher than ZBAL.TO's 8.07% return.

TGRO.TO

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 5.22%
• YTD: 9.93%
• 6M: 9.81%
• 1Y: 25.55%
• 3Y*: 19.69%
• 5Y*: 13.26%
• 10Y*: —

ZBAL.TO

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: 4.23%
• YTD: 8.07%
• 6M: 7.81%
• 1Y: 19.74%
• 3Y*: 14.66%
• 5Y*: 8.70%
• 10Y*: —

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

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
TGRO.TO TD Growth ETF Portfolio	9.93%	18.03%	22.28%	18.36%	-11.39%	20.46%	2,565.79%
ZBAL.TO BMO Balanced ETF	8.07%	12.93%	16.16%	12.63%	-11.09%	10.41%	5.36%

Correlation

The correlation between TGRO.TO and ZBAL.TO is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2020	0.84

The correlation between TGRO.TO and ZBAL.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

TGRO.TO

TGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 77
TGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
TGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
TGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 80
TGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
TGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 79

ZBAL.TO

ZBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 72
ZBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
ZBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
ZBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 74
ZBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
ZBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TD Growth ETF Portfolio (TGRO.TO) and BMO Balanced ETF (ZBAL.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.

	TGRO.TO	ZBAL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.58	2.37	+0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.62	3.44	+0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.45	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	3.41	+0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.71	14.34	+1.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.58, which is comparable to the ZBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TGRO.TO and ZBAL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TGRO.TO	ZBAL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58	2.37	+0.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.14	1.01	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.10	0.92	-0.82

Drawdowns

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TGRO.TO drawdown since its inception was -18.37%, smaller than the maximum ZBAL.TO drawdown of -20.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TGRO.TO and ZBAL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	TGRO.TO	ZBAL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.37%	-20.75%	+2.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.21%	-5.81%	-1.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.27%	-9.43%	-3.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.37%	-16.32%	-2.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-0.44%	+0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.46%	-3.17%	-0.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.63%	1.38%	+0.25%

Volatility

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Volatility Comparison

TD Growth ETF Portfolio (TGRO.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.28% compared to BMO Balanced ETF (ZBAL.TO) at 3.09%. This indicates that TGRO.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZBAL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TGRO.TO	ZBAL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.28%	3.09%	+0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.10%	6.60%	+1.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.93%	8.38%	+1.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.69%	8.72%	+2.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	995.08%	10.14%	+984.94%

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

TGRO.TO has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ZBAL.TO's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

TGRO.TO vs. ZBAL.TO - Dividend Comparison

TGRO.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.78%, more than ZBAL.TO's 1.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
TGRO.TO TD Growth ETF Portfolio	1.78%	2.03%	2.04%	2.17%	2.46%	1.58%	0.83%	0.00%
ZBAL.TO BMO Balanced ETF	1.74%	2.00%	2.20%	2.49%	2.74%	2.37%	2.55%	2.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TGRO.TO and ZBAL.TO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, TGRO.TO and ZBAL.TO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, TGRO.TO or ZBAL.TO?

On fees, TGRO.TO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TGRO.TO or ZBAL.TO?

TGRO.TO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for ZBAL.TO.

What is the main difference between TGRO.TO and ZBAL.TO?

TGRO.TO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while ZBAL.TO is Global Allocation. They also come from different issuers: TD and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for TGRO.TO and 0.18% for ZBAL.TO.