ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO
ZFL.TO (BMO Long Federal Bond) and ZEB.TO (BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZFL.TO is a Canadian Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE TMX Canada Long Term Federal Bond Index, while ZEB.TO is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZFL.TO returned -1.37%/yr vs 15.82%/yr for ZEB.TO. At a correlation of -0.17, they often move in opposite directions. ZFL.TO charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for ZEB.TO.
Performance
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZFL.TO achieves a 2.39% return, which is significantly lower than ZEB.TO's 19.22% return. Over the past 10 years, ZFL.TO has underperformed ZEB.TO with an annualized return of -1.37%, while ZEB.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 15.82% annualized return.
ZFL.TO
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- 2.93%
- YTD
- 2.39%
- 6M
- -0.37%
- 1Y
- -0.83%
- 3Y*
- -0.42%
- 5Y*
- -3.89%
- 10Y*
- -1.37%
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%
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZFL.TO BMO Long Federal Bond | 2.39% | -5.14% | -2.20% | 7.30% | -23.89% | -7.47% | 12.68% | 8.73% | 2.69% | 2.84% |
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% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZFL.TO and ZEB.TO is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 27, 2010 | -0.17 |
The correlation between ZFL.TO and ZEB.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (all time) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ZFL.TO
ZEB.TO
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
ZFL.TO
ZEB.TO
Basic Materials
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Communication Services
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Consumer Cyclical
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Consumer Defensive
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Energy
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Healthcare
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Industrials
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Real Estate
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Technology
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.TO
-
Utilities
ZFL.TO
-
ZEB.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
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZFL.TO
ZEB.TO
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Long Federal Bond (ZFL.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.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.
| ZFL.TO | ZEB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 1.90 | -0.90 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.12 | 7.17 | -7.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.22 | 30.84 | -31.06 |
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
| ZFL.TO | ZEB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.09 | 4.79 | -4.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.27 | 1.35 | -1.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.11 | 0.94 | -1.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.16 | 0.88 | -0.72 |
Drawdowns
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZFL.TO drawdown since its inception was -40.32%, roughly equal to the maximum ZEB.TO drawdown of -39.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZFL.TO and ZEB.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZFL.TO | ZEB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.32% | -39.69% | -0.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.68% | -8.44% | +1.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.51% | -14.80% | +0.29% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.25% | -25.97% | -6.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.32% | -39.69% | -0.63% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -31.87% | -2.00% | -29.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.45% | -5.65% | -6.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.82% | 1.96% | +1.86% |
Volatility
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for BMO Long Federal Bond (ZFL.TO) is 3.14%, while BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) has a volatility of 4.89%. This indicates that ZFL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ZEB.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZFL.TO | ZEB.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.14% | 4.89% | -1.75% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.05% | 11.14% | -4.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.72% | 12.62% | -2.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.71% | 13.52% | +1.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.54% | 16.91% | -4.37% |
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZFL.TO has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than ZEB.TO's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
ZFL.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZFL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.84%, more than ZEB.TO's 2.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
ZFL.TO BMO Long Federal Bond | 2.84% | 3.13% | 3.20% | 3.49% | 3.77% | 2.85% | 2.57% | 2.95% | 3.00% | 2.99% | 3.05% | 3.10% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZFL.TO and ZEB.TO have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZFL.TO is cheaper at 0.22% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZFL.TO is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for ZEB.TO.
ZFL.TO is categorized as Canadian Government Bonds, while ZEB.TO is Financials Equities. ZFL.TO tracks FTSE TMX Canada Long Term Federal Bond Index, while ZEB.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for ZFL.TO and 0.25% for ZEB.TO.
Find the right allocation for ZFL.TO and ZEB.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