PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO

Last updated Jul 18, 2026
Documentation

ZCM.TO (BMO Mid Corporate Bond Index ETF) and RUSB.TO (RBC Short Term U.S. Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZCM.TO is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Canada Mid Term Corporate Bond Index, while RUSB.TO is a Short-Term Bond fund actively managed by RBC. ZCM.TO is passively managed, while RUSB.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ZCM.TO returned 2.10%/yr vs 4.55%/yr for RUSB.TO. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Mid Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZCM.TO) and RBC Short Term U.S. Corporate Bond ETF (RUSB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZCM.TO achieves a 1.48% return, which is significantly lower than RUSB.TO's 3.05% return.

ZCM.TO

1D
-0.19%
1M
-0.34%
6M
0.71%
YTD
1.48%
1Y
5.30%
3Y*
6.82%
5Y*
2.10%
10Y*
2.93%

RUSB.TO

1D
-0.09%
1M
-0.28%
6M
1.59%
YTD
3.05%
1Y
6.15%
3Y*
7.50%
5Y*
4.55%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZCM.TO
BMO Mid Corporate Bond Index ETF		1.48%5.06%8.07%7.97%-10.18%-2.08%10.35%8.60%0.58%0.07%
RUSB.TO
RBC Short Term U.S. Corporate Bond ETF		3.05%1.61%13.88%3.94%-0.28%-0.52%1.46%2.36%7.83%-0.13%

Correlation

The correlation between ZCM.TO and RUSB.TO is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

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

-0.01

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

0.08

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

0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2017

0.08

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

BMO Mid Corporate Bond Index ETF

RBC Short Term U.S. Corporate Bond ETF

Often compared with ZCM.TO:
ZCM.TO vs. ZCS.TOZCM.TO vs. TCSH.TOZCM.TO vs. SYLD.TOZCM.TO vs. PMIF.TOZCM.TO vs. BND.TOZCM.TO vs. VAB.TOZCM.TO vs. XHB.TO
Often compared with RUSB.TO:
RUSB.TO vs. DCS.TORUSB.TO vs. MCSB.TORUSB.TO vs. QSB.TORUSB.TO vs. RBO.TORUSB.TO vs. RQP.TORUSB.TO vs. TUSB.TORUSB.TO vs. ZSDB.TO

Return for Risk

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZCM.TO
ZCM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
ZCM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZCM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZCM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
ZCM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZCM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank
RUSB.TO
RUSB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
RUSB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RUSB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
RUSB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
RUSB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
RUSB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
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.

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Mid Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZCM.TO) and RBC Short Term U.S. Corporate Bond ETF (RUSB.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.

ZCM.TORUSB.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.18
0.97

+0.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.64
1.38

+0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.21

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.73

1.72

+0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.03

3.74

+1.30

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZCM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is comparable to the RUSB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZCM.TO and RUSB.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

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZCM.TO drawdown since its inception was -26.06%, which is greater than RUSB.TO's maximum drawdown of -14.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCM.TO and RUSB.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZCM.TORUSB.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.06%

-14.28%

-11.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.08%

-3.60%

+0.52%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.82%

-5.26%

+1.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.81%

-8.10%

-7.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.06%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.01%

-1.81%

+0.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.59%

-4.11%

+1.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.05%

1.65%

-0.60%

Volatility

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Mid Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZCM.TO) is 1.22%, while RBC Short Term U.S. Corporate Bond ETF (RUSB.TO) has a volatility of 1.69%. This indicates that ZCM.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RUSB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZCM.TORUSB.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.22%

1.69%

-0.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.68%

4.13%

-0.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.51%

6.37%

-1.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.12%

6.95%

-0.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.75%

6.95%

+1.80%

Dividends

ZCM.TO vs. RUSB.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZCM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.30%, more than RUSB.TO's 4.14% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RUSB.TO
RBC Short Term U.S. Corporate Bond ETF		4.14%3.96%3.38%3.26%2.48%2.30%2.78%2.80%1.90%0.41%0.00%0.00%
ZCM.TO
BMO Mid Corporate Bond Index ETF		4.30%4.03%3.85%3.94%3.81%3.30%3.13%3.34%3.23%3.04%3.18%3.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

ZCM.TO and RUSB.TO have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ZCM.TO is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while RUSB.TO is Short-Term Bond. They also come from different issuers: BMO and RBC.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZCM.TO and RUSB.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