PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ZEQT.TO (BMO All-Equity ETF) and MEQT.TO (Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ZEQT.TO returned 32.71% vs 33.14% for MEQT.TO. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ZEQT.TO charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for MEQT.TO.

Performance

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO All-Equity ETF (ZEQT.TO) and Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF (MEQT.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ZEQT.TO having a 13.63% return and MEQT.TO slightly lower at 13.57%.

ZEQT.TO

1D
0.52%
1M
6.10%
YTD
13.63%
6M
13.00%
1Y
32.71%
3Y*
22.68%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

MEQT.TO

1D
0.62%
1M
6.20%
YTD
13.57%
6M
13.49%
1Y
33.14%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
ZEQT.TO
BMO All-Equity ETF		13.63%19.67%25.44%2.14%
MEQT.TO
Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF		13.57%21.31%25.87%2.16%

Correlation

The correlation between ZEQT.TO and MEQT.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 (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2023

0.54

The correlation between ZEQT.TO and MEQT.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (all time) to 0.67 (1 year), 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.

BMO All-Equity ETF

Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF

Often compared with ZEQT.TO:
ZEQT.TO vs. XEQT.TOZEQT.TO vs. VEQT.TOZEQT.TO vs. ZSP.TOZEQT.TO vs. VFV.TOZEQT.TO vs. HEQT.TOZEQT.TO vs. VGRO.TOZEQT.TO vs. TEQT.TO
Often compared with MEQT.TO:
MEQT.TO vs. VXC.TOMEQT.TO vs. XEQT.TOMEQT.TO vs. CAGE.TOMEQT.TO vs. FCIN.NEOMEQT.TO vs. TINF.TOMEQT.TO vs. XDG.TOMEQT.TO vs. VDU.TO

Return for Risk

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZEQT.TO
ZEQT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
ZEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZEQT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZEQT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
ZEQT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZEQT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
MEQT.TO
MEQT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
MEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MEQT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
MEQT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
MEQT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
MEQT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO All-Equity ETF (ZEQT.TO) and Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF (MEQT.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.

ZEQT.TOMEQT.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.58
3.05

-0.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.57
4.35

-0.78

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.60

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.77

4.33

-0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.90

18.64

-2.74

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

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.58, which is comparable to the MEQT.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZEQT.TO and MEQT.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

ZEQT.TOMEQT.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.58

3.05

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.20

2.14

-0.94

Drawdowns

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZEQT.TO drawdown since its inception was -16.87%, which is greater than MEQT.TO's maximum drawdown of -15.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZEQT.TO and MEQT.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZEQT.TOMEQT.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.87%

-15.14%

-1.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.72%

-7.68%

-1.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.34%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.64%

0.00%

-0.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.01%

-1.29%

-1.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.06%

1.78%

+0.28%

Volatility

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO All-Equity ETF (ZEQT.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.21% compared to Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF (MEQT.TO) at 2.93%. This indicates that ZEQT.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MEQT.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZEQT.TOMEQT.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.21%

2.93%

+2.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.42%

9.02%

+1.40%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.75%

10.93%

+1.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.85%

11.86%

+1.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.85%

11.86%

+1.99%

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZEQT.TO has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than MEQT.TO's 0.17% 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

ZEQT.TO vs. MEQT.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZEQT.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than MEQT.TO's 1.44% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022
MEQT.TO
Mackenzie All-Equity Allocation ETF		1.44%1.60%1.73%0.81%0.00%
ZEQT.TO
BMO All-Equity ETF		1.28%1.45%1.69%2.13%2.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

ZEQT.TO and MEQT.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, MEQT.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MEQT.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for ZEQT.TO.

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Mackenzie Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ZEQT.TO and 0.17% for MEQT.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZEQT.TO and MEQT.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