XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

XFR.TO (iShares Floating Rate Index ETF) and ZAAA.NEO (BMO AAA CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XFR.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Canada Floating Rate Note Index, while ZAAA.NEO is a CLO fund actively managed by BMO. XFR.TO is passively managed, while ZAAA.NEO is actively managed. Over the past year, XFR.TO returned 2.74% vs 6.65% for ZAAA.NEO. Their 0.02 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XFR.TO charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for ZAAA.NEO.

Performance

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Floating Rate Index ETF (XFR.TO) and BMO AAA CLO ETF (ZAAA.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XFR.TO achieves a 1.49% return, which is significantly lower than ZAAA.NEO's 4.69% return.

XFR.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.17%
• 6M: 1.22%
• YTD: 1.49%
• 1Y: 2.74%
• 3Y*: 3.85%
• 5Y*: 3.30%
• 10Y*: 2.27%
• ALL TIME*: 1.92%

ZAAA.NEO

• 1D: -0.59%
• 1M: -0.79%
• 6M: 4.67%
• YTD: 4.69%
• 1Y: 6.65%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.37%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
XFR.TO iShares Floating Rate Index ETF	CA$782.48K	CA$603.81K	CA$966.23K
ZAAA.NEO BMO AAA CLO ETF	CA$107.31K	CA$118.09K	CA$109.30K

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XFR.TO iShares Floating Rate Index ETF	1.49%	2.21%
ZAAA.NEO BMO AAA CLO ETF	4.69%	3.10%

Correlation

The correlation between XFR.TO and ZAAA.NEO is -0.03, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2025	0.02

Return for Risk

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XFR.TO

XFR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 98
XFR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
XFR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
XFR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
XFR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
XFR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 99

ZAAA.NEO

ZAAA.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 50
ZAAA.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
ZAAA.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
ZAAA.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 56
ZAAA.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
ZAAA.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 42

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Floating Rate Index ETF (XFR.TO) and BMO AAA CLO ETF (ZAAA.NEO). 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.

	XFR.TO	ZAAA.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.96	1.39	+2.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.57	1.99	+4.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.94	1.27	+0.67
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	28.60	2.09	+26.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	82.37	5.02	+77.35

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XFR.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.96, which is higher than the ZAAA.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XFR.TO and ZAAA.NEO, 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

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XFR.TO drawdown since its inception was -4.12%, which is greater than ZAAA.NEO's maximum drawdown of -3.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XFR.TO and ZAAA.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XFR.TO	ZAAA.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.12%	-3.01%	-1.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.10%	-3.01%	+2.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.30%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-0.30%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-4.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	-1.13%	+1.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.06%	-0.99%	+0.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.03%	1.25%	-1.22%

Volatility

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Floating Rate Index ETF (XFR.TO) is 0.19%, while BMO AAA CLO ETF (ZAAA.NEO) has a volatility of 1.49%. This indicates that XFR.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZAAA.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XFR.TO	ZAAA.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.19%	1.49%	-1.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.45%	3.24%	-2.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72%	4.52%	-3.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.84%	4.68%	-3.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.86%	4.68%	-2.82%

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XFR.TO has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than ZAAA.NEO's 0.23% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XFR.TO vs. ZAAA.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XFR.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.71%, less than ZAAA.NEO's 5.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
XFR.TO iShares Floating Rate Index ETF	2.71%	3.23%	4.93%	4.91%	1.84%	0.30%	1.07%	1.99%	1.64%	0.92%	0.65%	0.95%
ZAAA.NEO BMO AAA CLO ETF	5.11%	3.16%	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 XFR.TO and ZAAA.NEO in my portfolio?

XFR.TO and ZAAA.NEO have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XFR.TO or ZAAA.NEO?

On fees, XFR.TO is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XFR.TO or ZAAA.NEO?

XFR.TO is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for ZAAA.NEO.

What is the main difference between XFR.TO and ZAAA.NEO?

XFR.TO is categorized as Canadian Government Bonds, while ZAAA.NEO is CLO. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for XFR.TO and 0.23% for ZAAA.NEO.