XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

XBM.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF) and ZEB.TO (BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XBM.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Can Natural Resource NR CAD, while ZEB.TO is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XBM.TO returned 19.65%/yr vs 16.60%/yr for ZEB.TO. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XBM.TO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for ZEB.TO.

Performance

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBM.TO achieves a 31.10% return, which is significantly higher than ZEB.TO's 25.33% return. Over the past 10 years, XBM.TO has outperformed ZEB.TO with an annualized return of 19.65%, while ZEB.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 16.60% annualized return.

XBM.TO

• 1D: 2.73%
• 1M: -1.40%
• YTD: 31.10%
• 6M: 38.65%
• 1Y: 103.40%
• 3Y*: 26.59%
• 5Y*: 17.84%
• 10Y*: 19.65%

ZEB.TO

• 1D: 1.12%
• 1M: 9.87%
• YTD: 25.33%
• 6M: 26.07%
• 1Y: 67.94%
• 3Y*: 34.82%
• 5Y*: 19.53%
• 10Y*: 16.60%

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

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XBM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF	31.10%	50.69%	5.96%	2.84%	3.63%	27.94%	31.53%	9.95%	-22.42%	32.48%
ZEB.TO BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	25.33%	43.43%	24.58%	10.87%	-10.38%	39.38%	3.52%	16.06%	-8.85%	14.26%

Correlation

The correlation between XBM.TO and ZEB.TO is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2011	0.44

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XBM.TO	ZEB.TO
Basic Materials	99.8%	-
Industrials	0.2%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBM.TO

XBM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 85
XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
XBM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
XBM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 81
XBM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XBM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 87

ZEB.TO

ZEB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 97
ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
ZEB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ZEB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ZEB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
ZEB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.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.

	XBM.TO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.76	5.33	-2.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.09	7.18	-4.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.99	-0.57
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.35	8.09	-3.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.08	34.80	-18.73

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is lower than the ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 5.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBM.TO and ZEB.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

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBM.TO drawdown since its inception was -67.53%, which is greater than ZEB.TO's maximum drawdown of -39.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBM.TO and ZEB.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBM.TO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.53%	-39.69%	-27.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.88%	-8.44%	-15.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.45%	-14.80%	-22.65%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.57%	-25.97%	-14.60%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.25%	-39.69%	-17.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.34%	0.00%	-8.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.09%	-5.65%	-20.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.46%	1.96%	+4.50%

Volatility

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF (XBM.TO) has a higher volatility of 17.03% compared to BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) at 4.52%. This indicates that XBM.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZEB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XBM.TO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.03%	4.52%	+12.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.15%	11.13%	+21.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.63%	12.81%	+24.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.55%	13.55%	+20.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.88%	16.90%	+15.98%

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBM.TO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ZEB.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBM.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Dividend Comparison

XBM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than ZEB.TO's 2.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
XBM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Global Base Metals Index ETF	0.65%	0.86%	1.25%	2.09%	4.78%	3.05%	1.81%	3.73%	3.38%	1.65%	2.41%	5.75%
ZEB.TO BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	2.41%	2.95%	3.98%	4.75%	4.29%	3.13%	4.15%	3.65%	3.64%	3.02%	3.19%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBM.TO and ZEB.TO in my portfolio?

XBM.TO and ZEB.TO have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XBM.TO or ZEB.TO?

On fees, ZEB.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBM.TO or ZEB.TO?

ZEB.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for XBM.TO.

What is the main difference between XBM.TO and ZEB.TO?

XBM.TO is categorized as Energy Equities, while ZEB.TO is Financials Equities. XBM.TO tracks Morningstar Can Natural Resource NR CAD, while ZEB.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for XBM.TO and 0.25% for ZEB.TO.