ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO
ZCOM.NEO (BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units)) and HUC.TO (Global X Crude Oil ETF) are both Commodities funds - ZCOM.NEO tracks the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return while HUC.TO tracks the Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Both are passively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ZCOM.NEO charges 0.30%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for HUC.TO.
Performance
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZCOM.NEO achieves a 28.30% return, which is significantly lower than HUC.TO's 45.00% return.
ZCOM.NEO
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- -1.07%
- YTD
- 28.30%
- 6M
- 27.89%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HUC.TO
- 1D
- 1.46%
- 1M
- -1.28%
- YTD
- 45.00%
- 6M
- 41.59%
- 1Y
- 40.27%
- 3Y*
- 12.31%
- 5Y*
- 13.32%
- 10Y*
- 8.61%
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZCOM.NEO BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units) | 28.30% | 2.64% |
HUC.TO Global X Crude Oil ETF | 45.00% | -4.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZCOM.NEO and HUC.TO is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2025 | 0.52 |
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
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZCOM.NEO
HUC.TO
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units) (ZCOM.NEO) and Global X Crude Oil ETF (HUC.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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ZCOM.NEO | HUC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.60 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.30 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.76 | 0.13 | +2.62 |
Drawdowns
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZCOM.NEO drawdown since its inception was -5.97%, smaller than the maximum HUC.TO drawdown of -76.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCOM.NEO and HUC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZCOM.NEO | HUC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.97% | -76.99% | +71.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -16.20% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -30.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -61.56% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.96% | -2.80% | -0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.72% | -34.61% | +32.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 8.17% | — |
Volatility
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZCOM.NEO | HUC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 11.26% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 21.17% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.06% | 25.36% | -4.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.06% | 27.85% | -6.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.06% | 29.04% | -7.98% |
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZCOM.NEO has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than HUC.TO's 1.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZCOM.NEO vs. HUC.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZCOM.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.74%, while HUC.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
HUC.TO Global X Crude Oil ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZCOM.NEO BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units) | 5.74% | 2.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZCOM.NEO and HUC.TO have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZCOM.NEO is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZCOM.NEO is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for HUC.TO.
ZCOM.NEO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while HUC.TO tracks Solactive Light Sweet Crude Oil Winter MD Rolling Futures Index ER. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for ZCOM.NEO and 1.09% for HUC.TO.
Find the right allocation for ZCOM.NEO and HUC.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