PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMA.TO (iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF) and ZGD.TO (BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMA.TO is a Materials fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Materials TR, while ZGD.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Equal Weight Global Gold Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMA.TO returned 14.00%/yr vs 18.07%/yr for ZGD.TO. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF (XMA.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMA.TO achieves a 7.60% return, which is significantly higher than ZGD.TO's 6.26% return. Over the past 10 years, XMA.TO has underperformed ZGD.TO with an annualized return of 14.00%, while ZGD.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 18.07% annualized return.

XMA.TO

1D
-3.13%
1M
5.70%
YTD
7.60%
6M
12.34%
1Y
64.71%
3Y*
35.49%
5Y*
20.09%
10Y*
14.00%

ZGD.TO

1D
-3.34%
1M
2.10%
YTD
6.26%
6M
13.53%
1Y
83.82%
3Y*
55.62%
5Y*
30.59%
10Y*
18.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMA.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF		7.60%99.21%20.72%-2.04%1.35%3.31%19.73%24.63%-10.46%7.07%
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF		6.26%170.64%37.48%10.17%-2.30%-12.57%26.59%53.72%-12.09%-0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between XMA.TO and ZGD.TO is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.95

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

0.84

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

0.81

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 27, 2012

0.74

Over the past year, XMA.TO and ZGD.TO have become more correlated (0.95) than their long-term average of 0.74, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMA.TO
ZGD.TO

Basic Materials

98.4%
100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

1.6%

-

Industrials

0.0%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Basic Materials

XMA.TO
98.4%
ZGD.TO
100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

XMA.TO
1.6%
ZGD.TO

-

Industrials

XMA.TO
0.0%
ZGD.TO

-

Communication Services

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.TO

-

Energy

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.TO

-

Financial Services

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.TO

-

Healthcare

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.TO

-

Real Estate

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.TO

-

Technology

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.TO

-

Utilities

XMA.TO

-

ZGD.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 S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF

BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF

Often compared with XMA.TO:
XMA.TO vs. XGD.TOXMA.TO vs. XETM.TOXMA.TO vs. XIC.TOXMA.TO vs. ZUT.TOXMA.TO vs. XIT.TOXMA.TO vs. XEQT.TOXMA.TO vs. XBM.TO
Often compared with ZGD.TO:
ZGD.TO vs. XGD.TOZGD.TO vs. GLDZGD.TO vs. AMAX.TOZGD.TO vs. ZMT.TOZGD.TO vs. GDXUZGD.TO vs. SGDMZGD.TO vs. RGPM.NEO

Return for Risk

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMA.TO
XMA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
XMA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO
ZGD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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.

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF (XMA.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.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.

XMA.TOZGD.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.75
1.87

-0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.11
2.20

-0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.32

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.41

2.79

-0.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.76

7.60

-0.84

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

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the ZGD.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMA.TO and ZGD.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

XMA.TOZGD.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

1.87

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.73

0.85

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.49

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.29

-0.01

Drawdowns

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMA.TO drawdown since its inception was -64.13%, which is greater than ZGD.TO's maximum drawdown of -60.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMA.TO and ZGD.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMA.TOZGD.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.13%

-60.12%

-4.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-26.96%

-30.15%

+3.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.96%

-30.15%

+3.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.06%

-42.75%

+9.69%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.06%

-51.72%

+18.66%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.76%

-22.75%

+3.99%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-26.31%

-28.33%

+2.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.60%

11.06%

-1.46%

Volatility

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF (XMA.TO) is 13.42%, while BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF (ZGD.TO) has a volatility of 15.70%. This indicates that XMA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZGD.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMA.TOZGD.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.42%

15.70%

-2.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

30.86%

36.43%

-5.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

37.08%

45.11%

-8.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.55%

36.41%

-8.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.56%

37.35%

-10.79%

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XMA.TO and ZGD.TO have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

XMA.TO vs. ZGD.TO - Dividend Comparison

XMA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, more than ZGD.TO's 0.21% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XMA.TO
iShares S&P/TSX Capped Materials Index ETF		0.37%0.41%0.83%1.26%1.24%0.87%0.63%0.62%0.72%0.42%0.82%1.90%
ZGD.TO
BMO Equal Weight Global Gold Index ETF		0.21%0.22%0.59%0.76%0.77%0.38%0.16%1.20%0.00%0.00%0.32%0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.95, XMA.TO and ZGD.TO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMA.TO and ZGD.TO have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

XMA.TO is categorized as Materials, while ZGD.TO is Gold. XMA.TO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Materials TR, while ZGD.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Global Gold Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMA.TO and ZGD.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