ZCOM.NEO vs. ZEB.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZCOM.NEO (BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units)) and ZEB.TO (BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZCOM.NEO is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while ZEB.TO is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. ZCOM.NEO charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for ZEB.TO.

Performance

ZCOM.NEO vs. ZEB.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 BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.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 28.30% return, which is significantly higher than ZEB.TO's 19.22% return.

ZCOM.NEO

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: -1.07%
• YTD: 28.30%
• 6M: 27.89%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZEB.TO

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: 5.51%
• YTD: 19.22%
• 6M: 24.72%
• 1Y: 60.22%
• 3Y*: 32.73%
• 5Y*: 18.18%
• 10Y*: 15.82%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZCOM.NEO BMO Broad Commodity ETF (CAD Units)	28.30%	2.64%
ZEB.TO BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	19.22%	10.47%

Correlation

The correlation between ZCOM.NEO and ZEB.TO is -0.10, 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	-0.10

Return for Risk

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

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

ZEB.TO

ZEB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 96
ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
ZEB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
ZEB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
ZEB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ZEB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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. ZEB.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 Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.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	ZEB.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	4.79	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.35	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.94	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.76	0.88	+1.87

Drawdowns

ZCOM.NEO vs. ZEB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZCOM.NEO drawdown since its inception was -5.97%, smaller than the maximum ZEB.TO drawdown of -39.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCOM.NEO and ZEB.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZCOM.NEO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.97%	-39.69%	+33.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-8.44%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.80%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.97%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.69%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.96%	-2.00%	-0.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.72%	-5.65%	+3.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.96%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ZCOM.NEO	ZEB.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.89%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.14%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.06%	12.62%	+8.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.06%	13.52%	+7.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.06%	16.91%	+4.15%

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

ZCOM.NEO has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than ZEB.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZCOM.NEO vs. ZEB.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZCOM.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.74%, more than ZEB.TO's 2.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
ZEB.TO BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	2.54%	2.95%	3.98%	4.75%	4.29%	3.13%	4.15%	3.65%	3.64%	3.02%	3.19%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

ZCOM.NEO and ZEB.TO have a correlation of -0.10, 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 ZEB.TO?

On fees, ZEB.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

ZEB.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for ZCOM.NEO.

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

ZCOM.NEO is categorized as Commodities, while ZEB.TO is Financials Equities. ZCOM.NEO tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while ZEB.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for ZCOM.NEO and 0.25% for ZEB.TO.