PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ZEA.TO (BMO MSCI EAFE Index ETF) and XDGH.TO (iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both Global Equities funds - ZEA.TO tracks the MSCI EAFE Index while XDGH.TO tracks the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ZEA.TO returned 11.18%/yr vs 8.24%/yr for XDGH.TO. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.22% expense ratio.

Performance

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO MSCI EAFE Index ETF (ZEA.TO) and iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZEA.TO achieves a 10.79% return, which is significantly higher than XDGH.TO's 7.78% return.

ZEA.TO

1D
0.72%
1M
4.84%
YTD
10.79%
6M
10.55%
1Y
22.50%
3Y*
17.95%
5Y*
11.18%
10Y*
9.90%

XDGH.TO

1D
0.58%
1M
1.83%
YTD
7.78%
6M
9.10%
1Y
18.19%
3Y*
13.27%
5Y*
8.24%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZEA.TO
BMO MSCI EAFE Index ETF		10.79%24.28%11.56%16.02%-8.51%10.64%5.13%16.71%-6.24%4.30%
XDGH.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		7.78%14.60%10.46%8.74%-1.32%15.60%-4.34%22.32%-4.99%2.63%

Correlation

The correlation between ZEA.TO and XDGH.TO is 0.56, 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

0.56

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

0.55

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2017

0.54

The correlation between ZEA.TO and XDGH.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ZEA.TO
XDGH.TO

Financial Services

24.4%
13.2%

Industrials

20.0%
12.6%

Healthcare

10.5%
16.9%

Technology

10.5%
9.6%

Consumer Cyclical

7.6%
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
14.8%

Basic Materials

6.0%
2.4%

Communication Services

4.6%
3.3%

Energy

3.9%
10.3%

Utilities

3.9%
5.6%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.2%

Financial Services

ZEA.TO
24.4%
XDGH.TO
13.2%

Industrials

ZEA.TO
20.0%
XDGH.TO
12.6%

Healthcare

ZEA.TO
10.5%
XDGH.TO
16.9%

Technology

ZEA.TO
10.5%
XDGH.TO
9.6%

Consumer Cyclical

ZEA.TO
7.6%
XDGH.TO
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

ZEA.TO
6.8%
XDGH.TO
14.8%

Basic Materials

ZEA.TO
6.0%
XDGH.TO
2.4%

Communication Services

ZEA.TO
4.6%
XDGH.TO
3.3%

Energy

ZEA.TO
3.9%
XDGH.TO
10.3%

Utilities

ZEA.TO
3.9%
XDGH.TO
5.6%

Real Estate

ZEA.TO
1.9%
XDGH.TO
0.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

BMO MSCI EAFE Index ETF

iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with ZEA.TO:
ZEA.TO vs. XEF.TOZEA.TO vs. XEQT.TOZEA.TO vs. VXC.TOZEA.TO vs. XAW.TOZEA.TO vs. IEFAZEA.TO vs. VDU.TOZEA.TO vs. ZSP.TO
Often compared with XDGH.TO:
XDGH.TO vs. XDG.TOXDGH.TO vs. XHD.TOXDGH.TO vs. XEQT.TOXDGH.TO vs. XDUH.TOXDGH.TO vs. VFV.TOXDGH.TO vs. VIDY.TOXDGH.TO vs. ACWV

Return for Risk

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZEA.TO
ZEA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
ZEA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZEA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZEA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
ZEA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZEA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO
XDGH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
XDGH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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.

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO MSCI EAFE Index ETF (ZEA.TO) and iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.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.

ZEA.TOXDGH.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.62
1.89

-0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.32
2.85

-0.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.34

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.07

2.86

-0.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.07

8.50

-0.43

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZEA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the XDGH.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZEA.TO and XDGH.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

ZEA.TOXDGH.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.62

1.89

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

0.68

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.67

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

0.54

+0.06

Drawdowns

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZEA.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.80%, smaller than the maximum XDGH.TO drawdown of -32.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZEA.TO and XDGH.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZEA.TOXDGH.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.80%

-32.99%

+5.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.91%

-6.38%

-4.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.11%

-11.96%

-2.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.67%

-14.56%

-9.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.80%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.43%

-1.68%

+0.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.63%

-3.63%

-1.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.79%

2.15%

+0.64%

Volatility

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO MSCI EAFE Index ETF (ZEA.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.56% compared to iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.TO) at 2.51%. This indicates that ZEA.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDGH.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZEA.TOXDGH.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.56%

2.51%

+3.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.70%

6.86%

+4.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.93%

9.69%

+4.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.51%

12.13%

+1.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.92%

14.60%

+0.32%

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ZEA.TO and XDGH.TO have an expense ratio of 0.22%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

ZEA.TO vs. XDGH.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZEA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than XDGH.TO's 2.79% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XDGH.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.79%2.81%3.04%3.41%3.18%3.05%3.24%2.82%3.29%0.81%0.00%0.00%
ZEA.TO
BMO MSCI EAFE Index ETF		1.92%2.17%2.77%3.00%3.06%2.48%2.72%2.93%3.03%2.39%2.78%2.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

ZEA.TO and XDGH.TO have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.22% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ZEA.TO and XDGH.TO have the same expense ratio: 0.22% per year.

ZEA.TO tracks MSCI EAFE Index, while XDGH.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD. They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZEA.TO and XDGH.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