ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZBAL.TO (BMO Balanced ETF) and TGRO.TO (TD Growth ETF Portfolio) are both exchange-traded funds - ZBAL.TO is a Global Allocation fund actively managed by BMO, while TGRO.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by TD. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ZBAL.TO returned 8.70%/yr vs 13.26%/yr for TGRO.TO. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ZBAL.TO charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TGRO.TO.

Performance

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Balanced ETF (ZBAL.TO) and TD Growth ETF Portfolio (TGRO.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZBAL.TO achieves a 8.07% return, which is significantly lower than TGRO.TO's 9.93% return.

ZBAL.TO

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: 4.23%
• YTD: 8.07%
• 6M: 7.81%
• 1Y: 19.74%
• 3Y*: 14.66%
• 5Y*: 8.70%
• 10Y*: —

TGRO.TO

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 5.22%
• YTD: 9.93%
• 6M: 9.81%
• 1Y: 25.55%
• 3Y*: 19.69%
• 5Y*: 13.26%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ZBAL.TO BMO Balanced ETF	8.07%	12.93%	16.16%	12.63%	-11.09%	10.41%	5.36%
TGRO.TO TD Growth ETF Portfolio	9.93%	18.03%	22.28%	18.36%	-11.39%	20.46%	2,565.79%

Correlation

The correlation between ZBAL.TO and TGRO.TO is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2020	0.84

The correlation between ZBAL.TO and TGRO.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ZBAL.TO

ZBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 72
ZBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
ZBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
ZBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 74
ZBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
ZBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 75

TGRO.TO

TGRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 77
TGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
TGRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
TGRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 80
TGRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
TGRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Balanced ETF (ZBAL.TO) and TD Growth ETF Portfolio (TGRO.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.

	ZBAL.TO	TGRO.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	2.58	-0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.44	3.62	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.49	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.41	3.56	-0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.34	15.71	-1.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is comparable to the TGRO.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZBAL.TO and TGRO.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZBAL.TO	TGRO.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.37	2.58	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.01	1.14	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.10	+0.82

Drawdowns

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZBAL.TO drawdown since its inception was -20.75%, which is greater than TGRO.TO's maximum drawdown of -18.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZBAL.TO and TGRO.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZBAL.TO	TGRO.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.75%	-18.37%	-2.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.81%	-7.21%	+1.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.43%	-13.27%	+3.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.32%	-18.37%	+2.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.44%	-0.41%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.17%	-3.46%	+0.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.38%	1.63%	-0.25%

Volatility

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Balanced ETF (ZBAL.TO) is 3.09%, while TD Growth ETF Portfolio (TGRO.TO) has a volatility of 3.28%. This indicates that ZBAL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TGRO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZBAL.TO	TGRO.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.09%	3.28%	-0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.60%	8.10%	-1.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.38%	9.93%	-1.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.72%	11.69%	-2.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.14%	995.08%	-984.94%

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZBAL.TO has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than TGRO.TO's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

ZBAL.TO vs. TGRO.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZBAL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, less than TGRO.TO's 1.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
TGRO.TO TD Growth ETF Portfolio	1.78%	2.03%	2.04%	2.17%	2.46%	1.58%	0.83%	0.00%
ZBAL.TO BMO Balanced ETF	1.74%	2.00%	2.20%	2.49%	2.74%	2.37%	2.55%	2.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZBAL.TO and TGRO.TO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, ZBAL.TO and TGRO.TO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, ZBAL.TO or TGRO.TO?

On fees, TGRO.TO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZBAL.TO or TGRO.TO?

TGRO.TO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for ZBAL.TO.

What is the main difference between ZBAL.TO and TGRO.TO?

ZBAL.TO is categorized as Global Allocation, while TGRO.TO is Diversified Portfolio. They also come from different issuers: BMO and TD. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ZBAL.TO and 0.15% for TGRO.TO.