TOGA vs. NZAC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TOGA (Tremblant Global ETF) and NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) are both Global Equities funds. TOGA is actively managed, while NZAC is passively managed. Over the past year, TOGA returned -9.65% vs 24.74% for NZAC. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TOGA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for NZAC.

Performance

TOGA vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tremblant Global ETF (TOGA) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TOGA achieves a -13.57% return, which is significantly lower than NZAC's 8.83% return.

TOGA

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: 0.43%
• YTD: -13.57%
• 6M: -12.39%
• 1Y: -9.65%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NZAC

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 4.49%
• YTD: 8.83%
• 6M: 9.51%
• 1Y: 24.74%
• 3Y*: 19.06%
• 5Y*: 9.88%
• 10Y*: 12.16%

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

TOGA vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
TOGA Tremblant Global ETF	-13.57%	14.13%	17.42%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	8.83%	20.55%	10.90%

Correlation

The correlation between TOGA and NZAC is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2024	0.69

The correlation between TOGA and NZAC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

TOGA vs. NZAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TOGA	NZAC
Consumer Cyclical	33.5%	8.2%
Technology	28.2%	34.3%
Communication Services	26.1%	8.5%
Financial Services	9.2%	13.1%
Real Estate	3.1%	5.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.0%
Energy	-	1.2%
Healthcare	-	7.8%
Industrials	-	7.3%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

TOGA vs. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

TOGA

TOGA Risk / Return Rank: 5
TOGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
TOGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
TOGA Omega Ratio Rank: 5
TOGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
TOGA Martin Ratio Rank: 5

NZAC

NZAC Risk / Return Rank: 56
NZAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
NZAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
NZAC Omega Ratio Rank: 55
NZAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
NZAC Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

TOGA vs. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tremblant Global ETF (TOGA) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). 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.

	TOGA	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.47	1.92	-2.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.51	2.71	-3.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	1.34	-0.40
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.34	2.46	-2.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.77	10.68	-11.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TOGA vs. NZAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TOGA Sharpe Ratio is -0.47, which is lower than the NZAC Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TOGA and NZAC, 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

	TOGA	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.47	1.92	-2.39
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.59	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.71	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.35	0.61	-0.26

Drawdowns

TOGA vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TOGA drawdown since its inception was -28.50%, smaller than the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TOGA and NZAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	TOGA	NZAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.50%	-33.72%	+5.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.50%	-10.10%	-18.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.19%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.31%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.93%	-0.82%	-18.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.43%	-5.32%	-1.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.54%	2.32%	+10.22%

Volatility

TOGA vs. NZAC - Volatility Comparison

Tremblant Global ETF (TOGA) has a higher volatility of 5.48% compared to SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) at 3.72%. This indicates that TOGA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NZAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TOGA	NZAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.48%	3.72%	+1.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.38%	10.34%	+6.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.63%	12.94%	+7.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.02%	16.81%	+4.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.02%	17.14%	+3.88%

TOGA vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

TOGA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than NZAC's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

TOGA vs. NZAC - Dividend Comparison

TOGA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NZAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	2.04%	1.90%	1.88%	1.65%	1.81%	1.62%	1.59%	2.17%	2.53%	2.20%	2.00%	2.40%
TOGA Tremblant Global ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TOGA and NZAC in my portfolio?

TOGA and NZAC have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TOGA or NZAC?

TOGA has higher volatility (5.48%) compared to NZAC (3.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TOGA dropped -28.50% vs NZAC's -33.72%.

Which ETF is better, TOGA or NZAC?

On 1-year performance, NZAC leads with 24.74% vs -9.65% for TOGA. On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, NZAC has been the lower-risk option at 3.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TOGA or NZAC?

Over the 1-year period, NZAC has performed better with a 24.74% return vs -9.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TOGA or NZAC?

NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for TOGA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TOGA or NZAC?

NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 0.00% for TOGA.

What is the main difference between TOGA and NZAC?

They also come from different issuers: Tremblant Advisors and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for TOGA and 0.12% for NZAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NZAC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs -0.47), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.