ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ZCOM.NEO (BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units)) and HUG.TO (Global X Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZCOM.NEO is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while HUG.TO is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Gold Front Month MD Rolling Futures Index ER. Both are passively managed. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZCOM.NEO charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.54%/yr for HUG.TO.

Performance

ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units) (ZCOM.NEO) and Global X Gold ETF (HUG.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZCOM.NEO achieves a 26.81% return, which is significantly higher than HUG.TO's 2.21% return.

ZCOM.NEO

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: -1.72%
• YTD: 26.81%
• 6M: 26.33%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HUG.TO

• 1D: 0.77%
• 1M: -2.14%
• YTD: 2.21%
• 6M: 4.41%
• 1Y: 27.99%
• 3Y*: 28.10%
• 5Y*: 16.01%
• 10Y*: 10.77%

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

ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZCOM.NEO BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units)	26.81%	2.64%
HUG.TO Global X Gold ETF	2.21%	4.41%

Correlation

The correlation between ZCOM.NEO and HUG.TO is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2025	0.22

Return for Risk

ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HUG.TO

HUG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 29
HUG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
HUG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
HUG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 32
HUG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
HUG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.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 Gold ETF (HUG.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZCOM.NEO	HUG.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.88	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.66	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.59	0.43	+2.16

Drawdowns

ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZCOM.NEO drawdown since its inception was -5.97%, smaller than the maximum HUG.TO drawdown of -47.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCOM.NEO and HUG.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZCOM.NEO	HUG.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.97%	-47.99%	+42.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-19.27%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.27%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.06%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-24.66%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.08%	-17.94%	+13.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.74%	-22.95%	+21.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	8.11%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ZCOM.NEO	HUG.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.84%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	22.75%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.06%	26.48%	-5.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.06%	18.25%	+2.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.06%	16.41%	+4.65%

ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZCOM.NEO has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than HUG.TO's 0.54% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZCOM.NEO vs. HUG.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZCOM.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.81%, while HUG.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
HUG.TO Global X Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%
ZCOM.NEO BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units)	5.81%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZCOM.NEO and HUG.TO in my portfolio?

ZCOM.NEO and HUG.TO have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZCOM.NEO or HUG.TO?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZCOM.NEO or HUG.TO?

ZCOM.NEO is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for HUG.TO.

What is the main difference between ZCOM.NEO and HUG.TO?

ZCOM.NEO is categorized as Commodities, while HUG.TO is Gold. ZCOM.NEO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while HUG.TO tracks Solactive Gold Front Month 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 0.54% for HUG.TO.