PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (USCC.TO) and BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF (ZPH.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USCC.TO achieves a 11.95% return, which is significantly higher than ZPH.TO's 1.91% return.


USCC.TO

1D
-0.61%
1M
2.82%
6M
8.96%
YTD
11.95%
1Y
22.70%
3Y*
18.46%
5Y*
12.49%
10Y*
12.65%

ZPH.TO

1D
0.29%
1M
1.55%
6M
1.70%
YTD
1.91%
1Y
7.48%
3Y*
7.85%
5Y*
5.63%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
USCC.TO
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
11.95%9.19%31.45%17.35%-8.49%21.99%11.29%16.61%1.97%9.39%
ZPH.TO
BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF
1.91%9.47%4.21%22.61%-10.37%13.57%2.43%3.22%-6.77%3.90%

Correlation

The correlation between USCC.TO and ZPH.TO is 0.55, 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

0.55

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.50

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2017

0.30

Over the past year, USCC.TO and ZPH.TO have become more correlated (0.55) than their long-term average of 0.30, meaning their price movements have been converging.

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
USCC.TO
ZPH.TO

Technology

35.6%
42.2%

Financial Services

11.8%
17.2%

Communication Services

11.2%
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
2.7%

Healthcare

8.5%
17.1%

Industrials

8.3%
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
8.3%

Energy

3.5%

-

Utilities

2.4%

-

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Basic Materials

1.8%

-

Technology

USCC.TO
35.6%
ZPH.TO
42.2%

Financial Services

USCC.TO
11.8%
ZPH.TO
17.2%

Communication Services

USCC.TO
11.2%
ZPH.TO
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

USCC.TO
10.1%
ZPH.TO
2.7%

Healthcare

USCC.TO
8.5%
ZPH.TO
17.1%

Industrials

USCC.TO
8.3%
ZPH.TO
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

USCC.TO
4.9%
ZPH.TO
8.3%

Energy

USCC.TO
3.5%
ZPH.TO

-

Utilities

USCC.TO
2.4%
ZPH.TO

-

Real Estate

USCC.TO
1.9%
ZPH.TO

-

Basic Materials

USCC.TO
1.8%
ZPH.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

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

USCC.TO
USCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
USCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
USCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
USCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
USCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

ZPH.TO
ZPH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
ZPH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZPH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZPH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
ZPH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZPH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (USCC.TO) and BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF (ZPH.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.


USCC.TOZPH.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.21

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.40

1.24

+2.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.74

4.67

+9.07

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is higher than the ZPH.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USCC.TO and ZPH.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.40%, smaller than the maximum ZPH.TO drawdown of -33.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USCC.TO and ZPH.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


USCC.TOZPH.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.40%

-33.38%

+4.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.71%

-6.07%

-0.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.55%

-11.83%

-5.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.55%

-18.38%

+0.83%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.61%

-0.26%

-0.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.15%

-4.23%

+1.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.66%

1.60%

+0.06%

Volatility

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Volatility Comparison

Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (USCC.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.09% compared to BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF (ZPH.TO) at 2.53%. This indicates that USCC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZPH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


USCC.TOZPH.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.09%

2.53%

+0.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.30%

5.62%

+2.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.05%

6.54%

+3.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.84%

11.18%

+2.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.55%

12.60%

+1.95%

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

USCC.TO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than ZPH.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

USCC.TO vs. ZPH.TO - Dividend Comparison

USCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.48%, less than ZPH.TO's 10.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
USCC.TO
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
9.48%10.20%9.86%11.45%10.42%5.05%5.17%5.16%6.19%5.56%5.59%5.71%
ZPH.TO
BMO US Put Write Hedged to CAD ETF
10.40%10.06%9.95%8.18%8.83%7.27%7.67%7.26%6.98%5.94%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


USCC.TO and ZPH.TO have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, USCC.TO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

USCC.TO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ZPH.TO.

They also come from different issuers: Global X and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for USCC.TO and 0.65% for ZPH.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for USCC.TO and ZPH.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