PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMH.TO (iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and ZSML.TO (BMO S&P US Small Cap Index ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - XMH.TO tracks the S&P MidCap 400® CAD Hedged Index while ZSML.TO tracks the S&P SmallCap 600® Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMH.TO returned 6.09%/yr vs 8.17%/yr for ZSML.TO. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMH.TO charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for ZSML.TO.

Performance

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) and BMO S&P US Small Cap Index ETF (ZSML.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMH.TO achieves a 12.86% return, which is significantly lower than ZSML.TO's 16.56% return.

XMH.TO

1D
-0.06%
1M
3.81%
YTD
12.86%
6M
12.86%
1Y
22.40%
3Y*
13.91%
5Y*
6.09%
10Y*
9.24%

ZSML.TO

1D
-0.55%
1M
3.50%
YTD
16.56%
6M
13.03%
1Y
32.00%
3Y*
16.65%
5Y*
8.17%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
XMH.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		12.86%5.45%12.05%15.06%-14.93%21.83%7.33%
ZSML.TO
BMO S&P US Small Cap Index ETF		16.56%0.20%17.47%12.67%-11.12%28.32%13.69%

Correlation

The correlation between XMH.TO and ZSML.TO is 0.78, 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

0.78

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

0.72

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

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2020

0.55

Over the past year, XMH.TO and ZSML.TO have become more correlated (0.78) than their long-term average of 0.55, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMH.TO
ZSML.TO

Industrials

25.6%
15.5%

Technology

17.1%
15.1%

Financial Services

13.8%
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
13.4%

Healthcare

8.9%
11.2%

Real Estate

7.5%
7.7%

Energy

5.2%
5.8%

Basic Materials

5.0%
5.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
3.5%

Utilities

3.0%
2.0%

Communication Services

1.0%
3.6%

Industrials

XMH.TO
25.6%
ZSML.TO
15.5%

Technology

XMH.TO
17.1%
ZSML.TO
15.1%

Financial Services

XMH.TO
13.8%
ZSML.TO
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XMH.TO
9.7%
ZSML.TO
13.4%

Healthcare

XMH.TO
8.9%
ZSML.TO
11.2%

Real Estate

XMH.TO
7.5%
ZSML.TO
7.7%

Energy

XMH.TO
5.2%
ZSML.TO
5.8%

Basic Materials

XMH.TO
5.0%
ZSML.TO
5.2%

Consumer Defensive

XMH.TO
4.1%
ZSML.TO
3.5%

Utilities

XMH.TO
3.0%
ZSML.TO
2.0%

Communication Services

XMH.TO
1.0%
ZSML.TO
3.6%

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 U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

BMO S&P US Small Cap Index ETF

Often compared with XMH.TO:
XMH.TO vs. XMHQXMH.TO vs. VOTXMH.TO vs. VFV.TOXMH.TO vs. XEF.TOXMH.TO vs. USMVXMH.TO vs. XMD.TOXMH.TO vs. XSU.TO
Often compared with ZSML.TO:
ZSML.TO vs. TQSM.TOZSML.TO vs. AVUVZSML.TO vs. ZST.TOZSML.TO vs. XSMH.TOZSML.TO vs. VCN.TOZSML.TO vs. XSP.TOZSML.TO vs. XDU.TO

Return for Risk

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMH.TO
XMH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
XMH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
ZSML.TO
ZSML.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
ZSML.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZSML.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZSML.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
ZSML.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZSML.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) and BMO S&P US Small Cap Index ETF (ZSML.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.

XMH.TOZSML.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.42
1.83

-0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.12
2.75

-0.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.33

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.44

3.96

-1.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.87

13.45

-4.58

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

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMH.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is comparable to the ZSML.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMH.TO and ZSML.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

XMH.TOZSML.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.42

1.83

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.42

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.52

-0.11

Drawdowns

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMH.TO drawdown since its inception was -44.82%, which is greater than ZSML.TO's maximum drawdown of -35.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMH.TO and ZSML.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMH.TOZSML.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.82%

-35.32%

-9.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.24%

-8.12%

-1.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.81%

-26.87%

+2.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.86%

-26.87%

+1.01%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.82%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.06%

-0.55%

+0.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.04%

-8.85%

+1.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.53%

2.39%

+0.14%

Volatility

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMH.TO) is 4.16%, while BMO S&P US Small Cap Index ETF (ZSML.TO) has a volatility of 5.45%. This indicates that XMH.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZSML.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMH.TOZSML.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.16%

5.45%

-1.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.57%

12.34%

-0.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.94%

17.66%

-1.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.65%

19.58%

+0.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.96%

22.47%

-1.51%

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMH.TO has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than ZSML.TO's 0.22% 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

XMH.TO vs. ZSML.TO - Dividend Comparison

XMH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, less than ZSML.TO's 1.03% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XMH.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Mid-Cap Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.98%1.10%1.03%1.16%1.30%0.91%1.02%1.35%1.39%0.88%1.52%0.63%
ZSML.TO
BMO S&P US Small Cap Index ETF		1.03%1.21%1.22%1.47%1.72%1.02%1.29%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMH.TO and ZSML.TO have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMH.TO is cheaper at 0.16% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMH.TO is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.22% for ZSML.TO.

XMH.TO tracks S&P MidCap 400® CAD Hedged Index, while ZSML.TO tracks S&P SmallCap 600® Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XMH.TO and 0.22% for ZSML.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMH.TO and ZSML.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