XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO
XMM.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF) and ZLH.TO (BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMM.TO is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Morningstar EM GR CAD, while ZLH.TO is a Low Volatility fund actively managed by BMO. XMM.TO is passively managed, while ZLH.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMM.TO returned 6.06%/yr vs 7.63%/yr for ZLH.TO. Their 0.19 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. XMM.TO charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for ZLH.TO.
Performance
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMM.TO achieves a 18.53% return, which is significantly higher than ZLH.TO's 10.90% return. Over the past 10 years, XMM.TO has underperformed ZLH.TO with an annualized return of 6.06%, while ZLH.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 7.63% annualized return.
XMM.TO
- 1D
- 3.53%
- 1M
- -1.65%
- 6M
- 13.71%
- YTD
- 18.53%
- 1Y
- 23.63%
- 3Y*
- 14.39%
- 5Y*
- 7.96%
- 10Y*
- 6.06%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.62%
ZLH.TO
- 1D
- 0.85%
- 1M
- -0.50%
- 6M
- 6.22%
- YTD
- 10.90%
- 1Y
- 9.87%
- 3Y*
- 9.41%
- 5Y*
- 6.66%
- 10Y*
- 7.63%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.70%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$59.82K | CA$74.15K | CA$94.80K | |
| CA$166.79K | CA$231.43K | CA$179.30K |
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMM.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF | 18.53% | 7.65% | 16.66% | 4.10% | -7.83% | 3.95% | 4.32% | 1.36% | 2.38% | 18.75% |
ZLH.TO BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF | 10.90% | 5.90% | 10.95% | -2.11% | 0.20% | 22.07% | 2.34% | 25.20% | -1.85% | 11.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMM.TO and ZLH.TO is 0.10, 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. | 0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.10 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2016 | 0.19 |
The correlation between XMM.TO and ZLH.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.08 (3 years) to 0.19 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Financial Services
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Communication Services
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Consumer Cyclical
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Industrials
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Healthcare
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Consumer Defensive
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Utilities
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Energy
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Basic Materials
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
Real Estate
XMM.TO
ZLH.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
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XMM.TO
ZLH.TO
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF (XMM.TO) and BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.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.
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.
| XMM.TO | ZLH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.17 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.35 | 1.35 | +1.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.34 | 3.24 | +4.11 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMM.TO drawdown since its inception was -22.07%, smaller than the maximum ZLH.TO drawdown of -33.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMM.TO and ZLH.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMM.TO | ZLH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.07% | -33.34% | +11.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.09% | -7.35% | -2.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.09% | -8.49% | -1.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.42% | -14.66% | -0.76% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.07% | -33.34% | +11.27% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.89% | -0.86% | -4.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.19% | -3.89% | -1.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.23% | 3.06% | +0.17% |
Volatility
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF (XMM.TO) has a higher volatility of 7.33% compared to BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.TO) at 4.18%. This indicates that XMM.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZLH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMM.TO | ZLH.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.33% | 4.18% | +3.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.99% | 8.14% | +6.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.15% | 10.96% | +5.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.21% | 12.27% | -1.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.33% | 13.86% | -1.53% |
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMM.TO has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than ZLH.TO's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMM.TO vs. ZLH.TO - Dividend Comparison
XMM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.97%, more than ZLH.TO's 1.71% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMM.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF | 1.97% | 2.37% | 2.95% | 2.55% | 1.55% | 1.91% | 2.09% | 2.44% | 2.23% | 2.09% | 2.35% | 2.16% |
ZLH.TO BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF | 1.71% | 1.92% | 2.25% | 2.45% | 2.12% | 1.84% | 1.95% | 1.55% | 2.00% | 1.93% | 2.02% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMM.TO and ZLH.TO have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZLH.TO is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZLH.TO is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for XMM.TO.
XMM.TO is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while ZLH.TO is Low Volatility. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for XMM.TO and 0.30% for ZLH.TO.
Find the right allocation for XMM.TO and ZLH.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