PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XDG.TO (iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF) and ZMT.TO (BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - XDG.TO is a Global Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while ZMT.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Equal Weight Global Base Metals Index Canadian Dollar Hedged. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XDG.TO returned 11.34%/yr vs 20.69%/yr for ZMT.TO. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XDG.TO charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for ZMT.TO.

Performance

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDG.TO achieves a 9.07% return, which is significantly lower than ZMT.TO's 39.44% return.

XDG.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
3.72%
YTD
9.07%
6M
8.39%
1Y
19.79%
3Y*
15.60%
5Y*
11.34%
10Y*
—

ZMT.TO

1D
-3.52%
1M
16.19%
YTD
39.44%
6M
46.49%
1Y
109.69%
3Y*
42.46%
5Y*
20.69%
10Y*
17.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XDG.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF		9.07%13.74%17.44%7.06%1.78%15.16%-1.68%17.32%0.98%2.14%
ZMT.TO
BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged)		39.44%63.17%15.30%14.54%-6.65%11.04%14.70%15.82%-34.17%33.51%

Correlation

The correlation between XDG.TO and ZMT.TO is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

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

0.27

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

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2017

0.33

The correlation between XDG.TO and ZMT.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (1 year) to 0.33 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XDG.TO
ZMT.TO

Healthcare

16.9%

-

Consumer Defensive

14.9%

-

Financial Services

13.0%

-

Industrials

12.4%
10.1%

Energy

10.5%
3.7%

Technology

9.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

9.2%

-

Utilities

5.6%

-

Communication Services

3.3%

-

Basic Materials

2.3%
89.9%

Real Estate

0.2%

-

Healthcare

XDG.TO
16.9%
ZMT.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

XDG.TO
14.9%
ZMT.TO

-

Financial Services

XDG.TO
13.0%
ZMT.TO

-

Industrials

XDG.TO
12.4%
ZMT.TO
10.1%

Energy

XDG.TO
10.5%
ZMT.TO
3.7%

Technology

XDG.TO
9.3%
ZMT.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

XDG.TO
9.2%
ZMT.TO

-

Utilities

XDG.TO
5.6%
ZMT.TO

-

Communication Services

XDG.TO
3.3%
ZMT.TO

-

Basic Materials

XDG.TO
2.3%
ZMT.TO
89.9%

Real Estate

XDG.TO
0.2%
ZMT.TO

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF

BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged)

Often compared with XDG.TO:
XDG.TO vs. XDIV.TOXDG.TO vs. XEQT.TOXDG.TO vs. XAW.TOXDG.TO vs. XDU.TOXDG.TO vs. XDGH.TOXDG.TO vs. CYH.TOXDG.TO vs. SCHD
Often compared with ZMT.TO:
ZMT.TO vs. XBM.TOZMT.TO vs. ZGD.TOZMT.TO vs. COPPZMT.TO vs. COPXZMT.TO vs. SPYZMT.TO vs. REMXZMT.TO vs. SETM

Return for Risk

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XDG.TO
XDG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
XDG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
XDG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
ZMT.TO
ZMT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
ZMT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZMT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZMT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
ZMT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZMT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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.

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (XDG.TO) and BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged) (ZMT.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.

XDG.TOZMT.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.93
2.84

-0.91

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.79
3.23

-0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.44

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.53

4.63

-2.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.02

14.58

-5.56

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is lower than the ZMT.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDG.TO and ZMT.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XDG.TOZMT.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.93

2.84

-0.91

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.08

0.62

+0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.53

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.70

0.00

+0.70

Drawdowns

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDG.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.08%, smaller than the maximum ZMT.TO drawdown of -80.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDG.TO and ZMT.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XDG.TOZMT.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.08%

-80.73%

+53.65%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.87%

-23.81%

+15.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.33%

-33.28%

+20.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.33%

-41.01%

+28.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-67.51%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.95%

-3.52%

+1.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.92%

-43.15%

+40.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.20%

7.55%

-5.35%

Volatility

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (XDG.TO) is 3.12%, while BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged) (ZMT.TO) has a volatility of 14.55%. This indicates that XDG.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZMT.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XDG.TOZMT.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.12%

14.55%

-11.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.06%

31.86%

-23.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.31%

38.81%

-28.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.56%

33.74%

-23.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.14%

33.32%

-20.18%

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDG.TO has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than ZMT.TO's 0.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

XDG.TO vs. ZMT.TO - Dividend Comparison

XDG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%, more than ZMT.TO's 0.15% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XDG.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF		2.82%2.89%2.90%3.13%3.27%2.97%3.27%3.18%3.47%1.67%0.00%0.00%
ZMT.TO
BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged)		0.15%0.21%0.34%0.87%1.46%2.82%1.03%2.34%3.95%1.29%1.24%1.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

XDG.TO and ZMT.TO have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XDG.TO is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XDG.TO is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for ZMT.TO.

XDG.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while ZMT.TO is Energy Equities. XDG.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while ZMT.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Global Base Metals Index Canadian Dollar Hedged. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for XDG.TO and 0.61% for ZMT.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDG.TO and ZMT.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