PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZCS.TO) and iShares Core Canadian Long Term Bond Index ETF (XLB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZCS.TO achieves a 1.29% return, which is significantly lower than XLB.TO's 2.77% return. Over the past 10 years, ZCS.TO has underperformed XLB.TO with an annualized return of 2.79%, while XLB.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 4.56% annualized return.


ZCS.TO

1D
-0.04%
1M
1.02%
YTD
1.29%
6M
1.26%
1Y
3.96%
3Y*
5.98%
5Y*
2.85%
10Y*
2.79%

XLB.TO

1D
-0.11%
1M
3.02%
YTD
2.77%
6M
0.93%
1Y
2.84%
3Y*
8.16%
5Y*
4.63%
10Y*
4.56%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZCS.TO
BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF
1.29%4.41%7.42%6.67%-4.48%-0.76%6.10%5.01%1.23%1.04%
XLB.TO
iShares Core Canadian Long Term Bond Index ETF
2.77%-0.76%9.49%19.21%-14.38%1.26%16.52%12.85%-0.25%7.11%

Correlation

The correlation between ZCS.TO and XLB.TO is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.67

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

0.69

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

0.67

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2009

0.51

The correlation between ZCS.TO and XLB.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (all time) to 0.69 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZCS.TO
ZCS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
ZCS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZCS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZCS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ZCS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZCS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

XLB.TO
XLB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
XLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
XLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
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.

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZCS.TO) and iShares Core Canadian Long Term Bond Index ETF (XLB.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.


ZCS.TOXLB.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.07

+0.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.44

0.59

+1.85

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.64

1.11

+8.54

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZCS.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is higher than the XLB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZCS.TO and XLB.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ZCS.TOXLB.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.95

0.36

+1.59

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.00

0.37

+0.63

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

0.39

+0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.80

0.55

+0.25

Drawdowns

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZCS.TO drawdown since its inception was -13.95%, smaller than the maximum XLB.TO drawdown of -24.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZCS.TO and XLB.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZCS.TOXLB.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.95%

-24.34%

+10.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.63%

-4.85%

+3.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.63%

-9.74%

+8.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-7.76%

-24.34%

+16.58%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-13.95%

-24.34%

+10.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.04%

-2.17%

+2.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.89%

-4.05%

+3.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.41%

2.57%

-2.16%

Volatility

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF (ZCS.TO) is 0.69%, while iShares Core Canadian Long Term Bond Index ETF (XLB.TO) has a volatility of 2.77%. This indicates that ZCS.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZCS.TOXLB.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.69%

2.77%

-2.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.79%

5.77%

-3.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.05%

7.93%

-5.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.87%

12.68%

-9.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.38%

11.86%

-7.48%

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZCS.TO has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than XLB.TO's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

ZCS.TO vs. XLB.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZCS.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.93%, less than XLB.TO's 4.01% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XLB.TO
iShares Core Canadian Long Term Bond Index ETF
4.01%4.05%12.10%12.22%13.13%8.82%7.43%3.18%3.56%3.45%3.62%3.64%
ZCS.TO
BMO Short Corporate Bond Index ETF
3.93%3.60%3.27%3.35%3.23%2.99%2.88%2.96%2.88%3.04%3.34%3.53%

Frequently Asked Questions


ZCS.TO and XLB.TO have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ZCS.TO is cheaper at 0.11% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ZCS.TO is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XLB.TO.

ZCS.TO tracks FTSE Canada Short Term Corporate Bond Index, while XLB.TO tracks Morningstar Can 10+Y Core Bd GR CAD. They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for ZCS.TO and 0.20% for XLB.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZCS.TO and XLB.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