ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO
ZEB.TO (BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) and CIC.TO (CI Canadian Banks Covered Call Income Class ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. ZEB.TO is passively managed, while CIC.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZEB.TO returned 15.82%/yr vs 12.90%/yr for CIC.TO. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ZEB.TO charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for CIC.TO.
Performance
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZEB.TO achieves a 19.22% return, which is significantly higher than CIC.TO's 16.07% return. Over the past 10 years, ZEB.TO has outperformed CIC.TO with an annualized return of 15.82%, while CIC.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 12.90% annualized return.
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%
CIC.TO
- 1D
- -0.40%
- 1M
- 4.82%
- YTD
- 16.07%
- 6M
- 20.80%
- 1Y
- 49.89%
- 3Y*
- 26.94%
- 5Y*
- 14.52%
- 10Y*
- 12.90%
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZEB.TO BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF | 19.22% | 43.43% | 24.58% | 10.87% | -10.38% | 39.38% | 3.52% | 16.06% | -8.85% | 14.26% |
CIC.TO CI Canadian Banks Covered Call Income Class ETF | 16.07% | 36.24% | 21.30% | 6.58% | -10.99% | 33.76% | 1.89% | 14.12% | -8.88% | 12.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZEB.TO and CIC.TO is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2010 | 0.78 |
The correlation between ZEB.TO and CIC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (all time) to 0.95 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ZEB.TO
CIC.TO
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
ZEB.TO
CIC.TO
Basic Materials
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Communication Services
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Consumer Cyclical
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Consumer Defensive
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Energy
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Healthcare
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Industrials
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Real Estate
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Technology
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
Utilities
ZEB.TO
-
CIC.TO
-
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
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZEB.TO
CIC.TO
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) and CI Canadian Banks Covered Call Income Class ETF (CIC.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.
| ZEB.TO | CIC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.90 | 1.87 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.17 | 6.09 | +1.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 30.84 | 28.56 | +2.29 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ZEB.TO | CIC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.79 | 4.45 | +0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.35 | 1.15 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.94 | 0.80 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.88 | 0.69 | +0.19 |
Drawdowns
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZEB.TO drawdown since its inception was -39.69%, roughly equal to the maximum CIC.TO drawdown of -38.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZEB.TO and CIC.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZEB.TO | CIC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.69% | -38.55% | -1.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.44% | -8.23% | -0.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.80% | -14.32% | -0.48% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.97% | -26.34% | +0.37% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.69% | -38.55% | -1.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.00% | -1.58% | -0.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.65% | -5.49% | -0.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.96% | 1.75% | +0.21% |
Volatility
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Volatility Comparison
BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.89% compared to CI Canadian Banks Covered Call Income Class ETF (CIC.TO) at 4.00%. This indicates that ZEB.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CIC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZEB.TO | CIC.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.89% | 4.00% | +0.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.14% | 9.95% | +1.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.62% | 11.26% | +1.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.52% | 12.75% | +0.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.91% | 16.29% | +0.62% |
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZEB.TO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CIC.TO's 0.87% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZEB.TO vs. CIC.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZEB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, less than CIC.TO's 5.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIC.TO CI Canadian Banks Covered Call Income Class ETF | 5.25% | 5.72% | 6.71% | 7.37% | 7.64% | 5.48% | 9.56% | 6.16% | 6.61% | 5.68% | 6.72% | 7.31% |
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
With a correlation of 0.94, ZEB.TO and CIC.TO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
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.
ZEB.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for CIC.TO.
They also come from different issuers: BMO and CI. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for ZEB.TO and 0.87% for CIC.TO.
Find the right allocation for ZEB.TO and CIC.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