XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO
XETM.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF) and ZCS.TO (BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XETM.TO is a Materials fund tracking the S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index, while ZCS.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Canada Short Term Corporate Bond Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XETM.TO charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for ZCS.TO.
Performance
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
XETM.TO
- 1D
- -4.74%
- 1M
- -2.13%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZCS.TO
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 0.70%
- YTD
- 1.47%
- 6M
- 1.51%
- 1Y
- 3.92%
- 3Y*
- 6.24%
- 5Y*
- 2.94%
- 10Y*
- 2.82%
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
XETM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF | -4.36% |
ZCS.TO BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF | 1.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between XETM.TO and ZCS.TO is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 20, 2026 | 0.38 |
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
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XETM.TO
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ZCS.TO
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index ETF (XETM.TO) and BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZCS.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.
| XETM.TO | ZCS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.41 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.41 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 9.62 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XETM.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.13%, which is greater than ZCS.TO's maximum drawdown of -13.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XETM.TO and ZCS.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XETM.TO | ZCS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.13% | -13.95% | -11.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -1.63% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.63% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -7.76% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -13.95% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.50% | 0.00% | -14.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.20% | -0.89% | -8.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.41% | — |
Volatility
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XETM.TO | ZCS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.33% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 1.74% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 50.11% | 2.06% | +48.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 50.11% | 2.90% | +47.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 50.11% | 4.38% | +45.73% |
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XETM.TO has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than ZCS.TO's 0.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
XETM.TO vs. ZCS.TO - Dividend Comparison
XETM.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ZCS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.93%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XETM.TO iShares S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index 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% |
ZCS.TO BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF | 3.93% | 3.60% | 3.27% | 3.35% | 3.23% | 2.99% | 2.88% | 2.96% | 2.88% | 3.04% | 3.34% | 3.53% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XETM.TO and ZCS.TO have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZCS.TO is cheaper at 0.11% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZCS.TO is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for XETM.TO.
XETM.TO is categorized as Materials, while ZCS.TO is Canadian Government Bonds. XETM.TO tracks S&P/TSX Energy Transition Materials Index, while ZCS.TO tracks FTSE Canada Short Term Corporate Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for XETM.TO and 0.11% for ZCS.TO.
Find the right allocation for XETM.TO and ZCS.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