ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.TO
ZCOM.NEO (BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units)) and ZAG.TO (BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZCOM.NEO is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while ZAG.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.26, they often move in opposite directions. ZCOM.NEO charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for ZAG.TO.
Performance
ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZCOM.NEO achieves a 28.30% return, which is significantly higher than ZAG.TO's 1.70% return.
ZCOM.NEO
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- -1.07%
- YTD
- 28.30%
- 6M
- 27.89%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZAG.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.75%
- YTD
- 1.70%
- 6M
- 0.89%
- 1Y
- 3.25%
- 3Y*
- 4.24%
- 5Y*
- 0.76%
- 10Y*
- 1.66%
ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZCOM.NEO BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units) | 28.30% | 2.64% |
ZAG.TO BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF | 1.70% | -0.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZCOM.NEO and ZAG.TO is -0.26, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2025 | -0.26 |
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. ZAG.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZCOM.NEO
ZAG.TO
ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.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 BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF (ZAG.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 | ZAG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 0.73 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.12 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.23 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.76 | 0.45 | +2.30 |
Drawdowns
ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZCOM.NEO drawdown since its inception was -5.97%, smaller than the maximum ZAG.TO drawdown of -18.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCOM.NEO and ZAG.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZCOM.NEO | ZAG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.97% | -18.03% | +12.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.79% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -5.42% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -15.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -18.03% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.96% | -1.09% | -1.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.72% | -3.54% | +1.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.19% | — |
Volatility
ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZCOM.NEO | ZAG.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.68% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 3.43% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.06% | 4.46% | +16.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.06% | 6.58% | +14.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.06% | 7.11% | +13.95% |
ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZCOM.NEO has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than ZAG.TO's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZCOM.NEO vs. ZAG.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZCOM.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.74%, more than ZAG.TO's 3.42% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZAG.TO BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF | 3.42% | 3.48% | 3.44% | 3.47% | 3.56% | 3.04% | 2.88% | 3.03% | 2.92% | 2.95% | 3.07% | 3.13% |
ZCOM.NEO BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units) | 5.74% | 2.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZCOM.NEO and ZAG.TO have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZAG.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZAG.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for ZCOM.NEO.
ZCOM.NEO is categorized as Commodities, while ZAG.TO is Canadian Government Bonds. ZCOM.NEO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while ZAG.TO tracks FTSE Canada Universe Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for ZCOM.NEO and 0.09% for ZAG.TO.
Find the right allocation for ZCOM.NEO and ZAG.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