PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO MSCI EAFE Hedged to CAD Index ETF (ZDM.TO) and Fidelity International High Quality ETF (FCIQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ZDM.TO having a 12.44% return and FCIQ.TO slightly higher at 12.55%.


ZDM.TO

1D
0.13%
1M
1.16%
6M
7.93%
YTD
12.44%
1Y
24.57%
3Y*
17.15%
5Y*
12.50%
10Y*
10.86%

FCIQ.TO

1D
0.90%
1M
2.68%
6M
7.49%
YTD
12.55%
1Y
13.05%
3Y*
13.45%
5Y*
6.75%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
ZDM.TO
BMO MSCI EAFE Hedged to CAD Index ETF
12.44%20.34%12.72%18.62%-5.78%18.93%0.25%15.36%
FCIQ.TO
Fidelity International High Quality ETF
12.55%11.87%11.21%17.76%-16.23%5.22%25.89%18.15%

Correlation

The correlation between ZDM.TO and FCIQ.TO is 0.75, 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

0.75

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

0.74

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

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 18, 2019

0.68

The correlation between ZDM.TO and FCIQ.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZDM.TO
ZDM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
ZDM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZDM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZDM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
ZDM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZDM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

FCIQ.TO
FCIQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
FCIQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCIQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCIQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
FCIQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCIQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
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.

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO MSCI EAFE Hedged to CAD Index ETF (ZDM.TO) and Fidelity International High Quality ETF (FCIQ.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


ZDM.TOFCIQ.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.16

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.51

1.47

+1.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.36

4.02

+6.33

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZDM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is higher than the FCIQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZDM.TO and FCIQ.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...

Drawdowns

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZDM.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.45%, roughly equal to the maximum FCIQ.TO drawdown of -32.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZDM.TO and FCIQ.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZDM.TOFCIQ.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.45%

-32.88%

-0.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.82%

-8.91%

-0.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.07%

-13.41%

-0.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.63%

-32.88%

+17.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.13%

-1.23%

+0.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.14%

-6.85%

+1.71%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.38%

3.25%

-0.87%

Volatility

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO MSCI EAFE Hedged to CAD Index ETF (ZDM.TO) is 3.18%, while Fidelity International High Quality ETF (FCIQ.TO) has a volatility of 3.76%. This indicates that ZDM.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCIQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZDM.TOFCIQ.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.18%

3.76%

-0.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.46%

12.52%

-1.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.61%

15.16%

-1.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.88%

14.78%

-0.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.63%

16.56%

-0.93%

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZDM.TO has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than FCIQ.TO's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZDM.TO vs. FCIQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZDM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.90%, more than FCIQ.TO's 1.18% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCIQ.TO
Fidelity International High Quality ETF
1.18%1.59%1.64%1.94%2.54%1.56%0.54%1.42%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ZDM.TO
BMO MSCI EAFE Hedged to CAD Index ETF
1.90%2.13%2.71%2.97%3.20%2.38%2.80%2.97%3.29%2.47%3.30%2.53%

Frequently Asked Questions


ZDM.TO and FCIQ.TO have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ZDM.TO is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ZDM.TO is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FCIQ.TO.

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for ZDM.TO and 0.45% for FCIQ.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZDM.TO and FCIQ.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