PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO

Last updated Jul 14, 2026
Documentation

XUS.TO (iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF) and ZGI.TO (BMO Global Infrastructure Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XUS.TO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while ZGI.TO is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones Brookfield Global Infrastructure North American Listed Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XUS.TO returned 17.21%/yr vs 8.67%/yr for ZGI.TO. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XUS.TO charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for ZGI.TO.

Performance

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) and BMO Global Infrastructure Index ETF (ZGI.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XUS.TO achieves a 13.88% return, which is significantly lower than ZGI.TO's 18.96% return. Over the past 10 years, XUS.TO has outperformed ZGI.TO with an annualized return of 17.21%, while ZGI.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 8.67% annualized return.

XUS.TO

1D
-0.66%
1M
2.54%
6M
10.45%
YTD
13.88%
1Y
25.53%
3Y*
23.10%
5Y*
16.43%
10Y*
17.21%

ZGI.TO

1D
1.40%
1M
2.18%
6M
19.44%
YTD
18.96%
1Y
19.88%
3Y*
15.60%
5Y*
11.23%
10Y*
8.67%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XUS.TO
iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF		13.88%12.19%35.81%24.87%-11.33%28.81%17.22%27.24%5.11%15.32%
ZGI.TO
BMO Global Infrastructure Index ETF		18.96%1.01%25.45%-0.64%4.56%26.89%-10.43%25.26%-0.75%2.97%

Correlation

The correlation between XUS.TO and ZGI.TO is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

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

-0.10

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

0.14

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

0.30

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

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2013

0.46

The correlation between XUS.TO and ZGI.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.46 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XUS.TO
ZGI.TO

Technology

38.4%

-

Financial Services

11.0%

-

Communication Services

10.8%

-

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%

-

Healthcare

8.4%

-

Industrials

7.9%
1.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.6%

-

Energy

3.2%
44.8%

Utilities

2.1%
41.7%

Real Estate

1.8%
11.9%

Basic Materials

1.7%

-

Technology

XUS.TO
38.4%
ZGI.TO

-

Financial Services

XUS.TO
11.0%
ZGI.TO

-

Communication Services

XUS.TO
10.8%
ZGI.TO

-

Consumer Cyclical

XUS.TO
10.0%
ZGI.TO

-

Healthcare

XUS.TO
8.4%
ZGI.TO

-

Industrials

XUS.TO
7.9%
ZGI.TO
1.6%

Consumer Defensive

XUS.TO
4.6%
ZGI.TO

-

Energy

XUS.TO
3.2%
ZGI.TO
44.8%

Utilities

XUS.TO
2.1%
ZGI.TO
41.7%

Real Estate

XUS.TO
1.8%
ZGI.TO
11.9%

Basic Materials

XUS.TO
1.7%
ZGI.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 Core S&P 500 Index ETF

BMO Global Infrastructure Index ETF

Often compared with XUS.TO:
XUS.TO vs. XSP.TOXUS.TO vs. XEQT.TOXUS.TO vs. XUU.TOXUS.TO vs. ZSP.TOXUS.TO vs. VOOXUS.TO vs. VFV.TOXUS.TO vs. HXS.TO
Often compared with ZGI.TO:
ZGI.TO vs. CIF.TOZGI.TO vs. TINF.TOZGI.TO vs. ZCLN.TOZGI.TO vs. XCLN.TOZGI.TO vs. XIC.TOZGI.TO vs. EXIZGI.TO vs. ZLB.TO

Return for Risk

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XUS.TO
XUS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
XUS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
XUS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
ZGI.TO
ZGI.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
ZGI.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGI.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGI.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGI.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGI.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) and BMO Global Infrastructure Index ETF (ZGI.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.

XUS.TOZGI.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.10
1.57

+0.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.88
2.25

+0.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.27

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.97

3.00

-0.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.08

8.27

+2.81

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XUS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is higher than the ZGI.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XUS.TO and ZGI.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...

Drawdowns

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XUS.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.24%, smaller than the maximum ZGI.TO drawdown of -34.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XUS.TO and ZGI.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XUS.TOZGI.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.24%

-34.76%

+7.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.63%

-6.65%

-1.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.96%

-10.07%

-8.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.29%

-16.61%

-4.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.24%

-34.76%

+7.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.66%

-0.29%

-0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.23%

-4.37%

+1.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.31%

2.41%

-0.10%

Volatility

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS.TO) is 3.59%, while BMO Global Infrastructure Index ETF (ZGI.TO) has a volatility of 4.29%. This indicates that XUS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZGI.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XUS.TOZGI.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.59%

4.29%

-0.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.60%

10.20%

-0.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.24%

12.71%

-0.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.11%

13.39%

+1.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.53%

15.98%

+0.55%

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XUS.TO has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than ZGI.TO's 0.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

XUS.TO vs. ZGI.TO - Dividend Comparison

XUS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, less than ZGI.TO's 2.22% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XUS.TO
iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF		1.12%1.26%1.45%2.43%2.76%1.99%2.70%4.05%3.55%2.96%3.32%3.41%
ZGI.TO
BMO Global Infrastructure Index ETF		2.22%2.77%2.82%3.33%3.01%3.06%3.75%2.85%2.99%2.59%2.60%2.97%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

XUS.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for ZGI.TO.

XUS.TO is categorized as S&P 500, while ZGI.TO is Industrials Equities. XUS.TO tracks S&P 500 Index, while ZGI.TO tracks Dow Jones Brookfield Global Infrastructure North American Listed Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for XUS.TO and 0.61% for ZGI.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XUS.TO and ZGI.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