PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XYLP.L (Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF) and ZWC.TO (BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. XYLP.L is passively managed, while ZWC.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, XYLP.L returned 16.17% vs 29.21% for ZWC.TO. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XYLP.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.91%/yr for ZWC.TO.

Performance

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF (XYLP.L) and BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XYLP.L is traded in GBP, while ZWC.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the ZWC.TO values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XYLP.L achieves a 3.81% return, which is significantly lower than ZWC.TO's 11.23% return.

XYLP.L

1D
-0.97%
1M
2.04%
YTD
3.81%
6M
4.04%
1Y
16.17%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

ZWC.TO

1D
0.90%
1M
2.07%
YTD
11.23%
6M
12.13%
1Y
29.21%
3Y*
13.55%
5Y*
9.39%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
XYLP.L
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF		3.81%-0.40%19.03%3.35%
ZWC.TO
BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF		11.23%19.51%4.95%6.50%

Correlation

The correlation between XYLP.L and ZWC.TO is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2023

0.25

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF

BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF

Often compared with XYLP.L:
XYLP.L vs. JEQP.LXYLP.L vs. METY.DEXYLP.L vs. JEIP.LXYLP.L vs. SPY5.LXYLP.L vs. HLIF.TOXYLP.L vs. XYLDXYLP.L vs. COPX
Often compared with ZWC.TO:
ZWC.TO vs. ZWB.TOZWC.TO vs. VDY.TOZWC.TO vs. HDIV.TOZWC.TO vs. XEI.TOZWC.TO vs. ZDV.TOZWC.TO vs. ZWH.TOZWC.TO vs. HMAX.TO

Return for Risk

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XYLP.L
XYLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
XYLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XYLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
XYLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
XYLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
XYLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
ZWC.TO
ZWC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
ZWC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZWC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZWC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
ZWC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZWC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF (XYLP.L) and BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWC.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.

XYLP.LZWC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.21
3.31

-1.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.99
4.65

-1.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.63

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.70

4.93

-1.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.01

20.68

-8.67

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

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XYLP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is lower than the ZWC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XYLP.L and ZWC.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

XYLP.LZWC.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.21

3.31

-1.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

—

0.80

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.83

0.40

+0.43

Drawdowns

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XYLP.L drawdown since its inception was -19.30%, smaller than the maximum ZWC.TO drawdown of -39.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XYLP.L and ZWC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XYLP.LZWC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.30%

-39.75%

+20.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.39%

-5.86%

+1.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

—

-11.96%

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-17.34%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.09%

-0.21%

-1.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.81%

-6.03%

+1.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.35%

1.39%

-0.04%

Volatility

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF (XYLP.L) is 2.43%, while BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWC.TO) has a volatility of 2.56%. This indicates that XYLP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZWC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XYLP.LZWC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.43%

2.56%

-0.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.73%

7.01%

-1.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.35%

8.72%

-1.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.40%

11.87%

-1.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.40%

17.31%

-6.91%

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XYLP.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than ZWC.TO's 0.91% expense ratio.

Dividends

XYLP.L vs. ZWC.TO - Dividend Comparison

XYLP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.79%, more than ZWC.TO's 5.58% yield.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
XYLP.L
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call UCITS ETF		7.79%9.76%6.22%3.98%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ZWC.TO
BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF		5.58%5.92%6.73%7.62%7.01%6.60%8.15%6.92%7.11%5.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

XYLP.L and ZWC.TO have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XYLP.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XYLP.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.91% for ZWC.TO.

They also come from different issuers: Global X and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for XYLP.L and 0.91% for ZWC.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XYLP.L and ZWC.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