PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XINC.TO (iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio) and ZAG.TO (BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XINC.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by iShares, while ZAG.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index. XINC.TO is actively managed, while ZAG.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XINC.TO returned 3.19%/yr vs 0.76%/yr for ZAG.TO. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XINC.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for ZAG.TO.

Performance

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio (XINC.TO) and BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF (ZAG.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XINC.TO achieves a 3.53% return, which is significantly higher than ZAG.TO's 1.70% return.

XINC.TO

1D
0.09%
1M
2.26%
YTD
3.53%
6M
3.10%
1Y
8.23%
3Y*
7.73%
5Y*
3.19%
10Y*
—

ZAG.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
1.82%
YTD
1.70%
6M
1.18%
1Y
2.95%
3Y*
4.31%
5Y*
0.76%
10Y*
1.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
XINC.TO
iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio		3.53%6.71%7.76%8.51%-11.25%1.27%9.16%1.23%
ZAG.TO
BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF		1.70%2.25%4.48%6.41%-11.60%-2.60%8.34%-1.78%

Correlation

The correlation between XINC.TO and ZAG.TO is 0.67, 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

0.67

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

0.50

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2019

0.52

The correlation between XINC.TO and ZAG.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (3 years) to 0.67 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XINC.TO
ZAG.TO

Technology

4.8%

-

Financial Services

4.3%

-

Industrials

1.9%

-

Energy

1.5%

-

Consumer Cyclical

1.4%

-

Communication Services

1.3%

-

Basic Materials

1.3%

-

Healthcare

1.2%

-

Consumer Defensive

0.9%

-

Utilities

0.5%

-

Real Estate

0.3%
0.0%

Technology

XINC.TO
4.8%
ZAG.TO

-

Financial Services

XINC.TO
4.3%
ZAG.TO

-

Industrials

XINC.TO
1.9%
ZAG.TO

-

Energy

XINC.TO
1.5%
ZAG.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

XINC.TO
1.4%
ZAG.TO

-

Communication Services

XINC.TO
1.3%
ZAG.TO

-

Basic Materials

XINC.TO
1.3%
ZAG.TO

-

Healthcare

XINC.TO
1.2%
ZAG.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

XINC.TO
0.9%
ZAG.TO

-

Utilities

XINC.TO
0.5%
ZAG.TO

-

Real Estate

XINC.TO
0.3%
ZAG.TO
0.0%

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 Income Balanced ETF Portfolio

BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF

Often compared with XINC.TO:
XINC.TO vs. XCNS.TOXINC.TO vs. VFV.TOXINC.TO vs. XEQT.TOXINC.TO vs. XGRO.TOXINC.TO vs. XSUS.TOXINC.TO vs. ZMMK.TOXINC.TO vs. XBAL.TO
Often compared with ZAG.TO:
ZAG.TO vs. VAB.TOZAG.TO vs. XBB.TOZAG.TO vs. XSB.TOZAG.TO vs. ZMMK.TOZAG.TO vs. ZST.TOZAG.TO vs. XBBZAG.TO vs. XCB.TO

Return for Risk

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XINC.TO
XINC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
XINC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XINC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
XINC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
XINC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
XINC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
ZAG.TO
ZAG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
ZAG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZAG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZAG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
ZAG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZAG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
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.

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio (XINC.TO) and BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF (ZAG.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.

XINC.TOZAG.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.68
0.67

+1.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.44
0.94

+1.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.12

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.26

1.06

+1.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.54

2.48

+6.06

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

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XINC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is higher than the ZAG.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XINC.TO and ZAG.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

XINC.TOZAG.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.68

0.67

+1.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.50

0.12

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.24

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.45

+0.10

Drawdowns

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XINC.TO drawdown since its inception was -15.40%, smaller than the maximum ZAG.TO drawdown of -18.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XINC.TO and ZAG.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XINC.TOZAG.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.40%

-18.03%

+2.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.65%

-2.79%

-0.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.36%

-5.42%

+1.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.40%

-15.77%

+0.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-18.03%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.05%

-1.09%

+1.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.74%

-3.54%

-0.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.97%

1.19%

-0.22%

Volatility

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio (XINC.TO) has a higher volatility of 1.92% compared to BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF (ZAG.TO) at 1.68%. This indicates that XINC.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZAG.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XINC.TOZAG.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.92%

1.68%

+0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.13%

3.43%

+0.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.93%

4.45%

+0.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.42%

6.58%

-0.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.73%

7.11%

-0.38%

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XINC.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than ZAG.TO's 0.09% 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

XINC.TO vs. ZAG.TO - Dividend Comparison

XINC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.19%, less than ZAG.TO's 3.42% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XINC.TO
iShares Core Income Balanced ETF Portfolio		3.19%3.16%2.81%2.87%2.54%2.02%2.40%0.93%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ZAG.TO
BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF		3.42%3.48%3.44%3.47%3.56%3.04%2.88%3.03%2.92%2.95%3.07%3.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

XINC.TO and ZAG.TO have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ZAG.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ZAG.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XINC.TO.

XINC.TO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while ZAG.TO is Canadian Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XINC.TO and 0.09% for ZAG.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XINC.TO and ZAG.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