XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO
XGRO.TO (iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio) and ZMI.TO (BMO Monthly Income ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, XGRO.TO returned 10.17%/yr vs 6.61%/yr for ZMI.TO. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XGRO.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for ZMI.TO.
Performance
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XGRO.TO achieves a 10.70% return, which is significantly higher than ZMI.TO's 9.38% return. Over the past 10 years, XGRO.TO has outperformed ZMI.TO with an annualized return of 10.17%, while ZMI.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 6.61% annualized return.
XGRO.TO
- 1D
- 0.29%
- 1M
- 5.00%
- YTD
- 10.70%
- 6M
- 8.71%
- 1Y
- 23.83%
- 3Y*
- 18.10%
- 5Y*
- 10.89%
- 10Y*
- 10.17%
ZMI.TO
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 4.20%
- YTD
- 9.38%
- 6M
- 6.03%
- 1Y
- 16.07%
- 3Y*
- 12.51%
- 5Y*
- 7.80%
- 10Y*
- 6.61%
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XGRO.TO iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio | 10.70% | 15.59% | 19.53% | 15.01% | -11.08% | 14.29% | 11.51% | 17.97% | -6.73% | 11.61% |
ZMI.TO BMO Monthly Income ETF | 9.38% | 7.88% | 13.43% | 9.00% | -5.89% | 11.25% | 2.40% | 13.37% | -2.52% | 4.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between XGRO.TO and ZMI.TO is 0.77, 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 | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2011 | 0.65 |
The correlation between XGRO.TO and ZMI.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (all time) to 0.79 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Energy
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Financial Services
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Industrials
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Energy
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Communication Services
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Consumer Cyclical
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Basic Materials
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Healthcare
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Consumer Defensive
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Utilities
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
Real Estate
XGRO.TO
ZMI.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
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XGRO.TO
ZMI.TO
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) and BMO Monthly Income ETF (ZMI.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.
| XGRO.TO | ZMI.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.47 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.36 | 3.40 | -0.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.92 | 11.09 | +3.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XGRO.TO | ZMI.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.22 | 2.27 | -0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.99 | 1.05 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.83 | 0.75 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 0.77 | -0.41 |
Drawdowns
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XGRO.TO drawdown since its inception was -47.97%, which is greater than ZMI.TO's maximum drawdown of -26.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGRO.TO and ZMI.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XGRO.TO | ZMI.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.97% | -26.65% | -21.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.12% | -4.75% | -2.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.47% | -8.81% | -3.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.40% | -12.65% | -5.75% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.85% | -26.65% | +0.80% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.49% | -2.12% | -6.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.60% | 1.45% | +0.15% |
Volatility
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio (XGRO.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.40% compared to BMO Monthly Income ETF (ZMI.TO) at 2.26%. This indicates that XGRO.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZMI.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XGRO.TO | ZMI.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.40% | 2.26% | +1.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.20% | 5.81% | +3.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.78% | 7.10% | +3.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.05% | 7.43% | +3.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.26% | 8.87% | +3.39% |
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XGRO.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than ZMI.TO's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
XGRO.TO vs. ZMI.TO - Dividend Comparison
XGRO.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, less than ZMI.TO's 3.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XGRO.TO iShares Core Growth ETF Portfolio | 1.75% | 1.92% | 1.98% | 2.22% | 1.86% | 1.66% | 1.94% | 2.21% | 7.42% | 2.04% | 2.65% | 2.15% |
ZMI.TO BMO Monthly Income ETF | 3.92% | 4.54% | 4.68% | 4.94% | 4.49% | 3.71% | 4.21% | 4.24% | 4.58% | 4.06% | 3.89% | 3.89% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XGRO.TO and ZMI.TO have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZMI.TO is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZMI.TO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XGRO.TO.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XGRO.TO and 0.18% for ZMI.TO.
Find the right allocation for XGRO.TO and ZMI.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