XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO
XMS.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and ZUQ.TO (BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - XMS.TO tracks the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index while ZUQ.TO tracks the MSCI USA Quality Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMS.TO returned 7.82%/yr vs 16.38%/yr for ZUQ.TO. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.33% expense ratio.
Performance
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMS.TO achieves a 1.17% return, which is significantly lower than ZUQ.TO's 9.39% return. Over the past 10 years, XMS.TO has underperformed ZUQ.TO with an annualized return of 7.82%, while ZUQ.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 16.38% annualized return.
XMS.TO
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 1.94%
- YTD
- 1.17%
- 6M
- -0.55%
- 1Y
- 0.08%
- 3Y*
- 8.89%
- 5Y*
- 5.12%
- 10Y*
- 7.82%
ZUQ.TO
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- 5.91%
- YTD
- 9.39%
- 6M
- 3.18%
- 1Y
- 19.10%
- 3Y*
- 20.39%
- 5Y*
- 15.26%
- 10Y*
- 16.38%
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMS.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 1.17% | 3.71% | 14.23% | 7.84% | -11.15% | 21.02% | 1.81% | 26.70% | -1.63% | 16.85% |
ZUQ.TO BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF | 9.39% | 5.78% | 34.02% | 33.24% | -18.33% | 26.40% | 19.92% | 31.74% | 4.70% | 16.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMS.TO and ZUQ.TO is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2016 | 0.42 |
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Energy
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Technology
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Financial Services
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Healthcare
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Consumer Defensive
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Utilities
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Consumer Cyclical
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Industrials
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Communication Services
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Energy
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
Real Estate
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
-
Basic Materials
XMS.TO
ZUQ.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
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XMS.TO
ZUQ.TO
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) and BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF (ZUQ.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.
| XMS.TO | ZUQ.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.55 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.30 | -0.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.01 | 1.81 | -1.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.03 | 5.87 | -5.84 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XMS.TO | ZUQ.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.01 | 1.56 | -1.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 | 0.94 | -0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | 0.94 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 0.94 | -0.39 |
Drawdowns
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMS.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.48%, which is greater than ZUQ.TO's maximum drawdown of -26.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMS.TO and ZUQ.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMS.TO | ZUQ.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.48% | -26.94% | -9.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.91% | -10.57% | +3.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.82% | -17.93% | +8.11% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.23% | -26.94% | +7.71% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.48% | -26.94% | -9.54% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.73% | -0.10% | -1.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.26% | -4.60% | +0.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.54% | 3.26% | -0.72% |
Volatility
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XMS.TO) and BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF (ZUQ.TO) have volatilities of 2.35% and 2.31%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMS.TO | ZUQ.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.35% | 2.31% | +0.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.14% | 9.60% | -3.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.75% | 12.29% | -3.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.11% | 16.35% | -4.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.74% | 17.52% | -2.78% |
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both XMS.TO and ZUQ.TO have an expense ratio of 0.33%.
Dividends
XMS.TO vs. ZUQ.TO - Dividend Comparison
XMS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, more than ZUQ.TO's 0.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMS.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) | 1.18% | 1.08% | 1.21% | 1.38% | 1.20% | 0.99% | 1.66% | 1.40% | 1.54% | 1.53% | 1.43% | 0.00% |
ZUQ.TO BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF | 0.43% | 0.46% | 0.57% | 0.86% | 0.99% | 0.80% | 0.96% | 0.96% | 1.07% | 1.16% | 1.00% | 0.88% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMS.TO and ZUQ.TO have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.33% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMS.TO and ZUQ.TO have the same expense ratio: 0.33% per year.
XMS.TO tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility (USD) 100% Hedged to CAD Index, while ZUQ.TO tracks MSCI USA Quality Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO.
Find the right allocation for XMS.TO and ZUQ.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