PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) and BMO S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF (ZCN.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZEB.TO achieves a 19.22% return, which is significantly higher than ZCN.TO's 10.70% return. Over the past 10 years, ZEB.TO has outperformed ZCN.TO with an annualized return of 15.82%, while ZCN.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 12.62% 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%

ZCN.TO

1D
-1.14%
1M
3.62%
YTD
10.70%
6M
12.95%
1Y
34.77%
3Y*
23.62%
5Y*
14.90%
10Y*
12.62%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
ZCN.TO
BMO S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF
10.70%31.51%21.64%11.63%-5.84%25.05%5.69%22.85%-8.84%8.94%

Correlation

The correlation between ZEB.TO and ZCN.TO is 0.69, 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

0.69

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

0.75

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

0.77

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

0.74

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

0.73

The correlation between ZEB.TO and ZCN.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ZEB.TO
ZCN.TO

Financial Services

100.0%
32.8%

Basic Materials

-

18.4%

Communication Services

-

1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

-

3.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.9%

Energy

-

17.5%

Healthcare

-

0.1%

Industrials

-

10.3%

Real Estate

-

1.6%

Technology

-

7.6%

Utilities

-

3.2%

Financial Services

ZEB.TO
100.0%
ZCN.TO
32.8%

Basic Materials

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
18.4%

Communication Services

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
2.9%

Energy

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
17.5%

Healthcare

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
0.1%

Industrials

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
10.3%

Real Estate

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
1.6%

Technology

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
7.6%

Utilities

ZEB.TO

-

ZCN.TO
3.2%

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. ZCN.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: 9696
Overall Rank
ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZEB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZEB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
ZEB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZEB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

ZCN.TO
ZCN.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
ZCN.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZCN.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZCN.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
ZCN.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZCN.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.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 BMO S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF (ZCN.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.TOZCN.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.97

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.90

1.50

+0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.17

3.75

+3.42

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

30.84

17.48

+13.36

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 4.79, which is higher than the ZCN.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZEB.TO and ZCN.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


ZEB.TOZCN.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.79

2.76

+2.03

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

0.85

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.88

0.68

+0.21

Drawdowns

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZEB.TO drawdown since its inception was -39.69%, which is greater than ZCN.TO's maximum drawdown of -37.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZEB.TO and ZCN.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZEB.TOZCN.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.69%

-37.18%

-2.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.44%

-9.30%

+0.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.80%

-12.25%

-2.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.97%

-16.25%

-9.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.69%

-37.18%

-2.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.00%

-1.14%

-0.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.65%

-4.76%

-0.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.96%

1.99%

-0.03%

Volatility

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.89% compared to BMO S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF (ZCN.TO) at 3.49%. This indicates that ZEB.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZCN.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZEB.TOZCN.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.89%

3.49%

+1.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.14%

10.31%

+0.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.62%

12.66%

-0.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.52%

13.09%

+0.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.91%

14.99%

+1.92%

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZEB.TO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than ZCN.TO's 0.06% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

ZEB.TO vs. ZCN.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZEB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, more than ZCN.TO's 2.03% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ZCN.TO
BMO S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF
2.03%2.22%2.78%3.29%3.27%2.74%3.24%3.13%3.16%2.71%2.84%3.33%
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


ZEB.TO and ZCN.TO have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ZCN.TO is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ZCN.TO is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for ZEB.TO.

ZEB.TO is categorized as Financials Equities, while ZCN.TO is Canada Equities. ZEB.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index, while ZCN.TO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for ZEB.TO and 0.06% for ZCN.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZEB.TO and ZCN.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