PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZGQ.TO (BMO MSCI All Country World High Quality Index ETF) and ZEB.TO (BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZGQ.TO is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World High Quality 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, ZGQ.TO returned 15.07%/yr vs 15.82%/yr for ZEB.TO. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZGQ.TO charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for ZEB.TO.

Performance

ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO MSCI All Country World High Quality Index ETF (ZGQ.TO) and BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZGQ.TO achieves a 13.23% return, which is significantly lower than ZEB.TO's 19.22% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ZGQ.TO having a 15.07% annualized return and ZEB.TO not far ahead at 15.82%.

ZGQ.TO

1D
-0.05%
1M
6.84%
YTD
13.23%
6M
8.19%
1Y
25.52%
3Y*
20.50%
5Y*
13.96%
10Y*
15.07%

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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZGQ.TO
BMO MSCI All Country World High Quality Index ETF		13.23%8.04%29.47%29.38%-18.76%21.44%22.41%28.91%-0.12%19.54%
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 ZGQ.TO and ZEB.TO is 0.57, 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

0.57

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

0.48

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

0.48

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

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2014

0.38

The correlation between ZGQ.TO and ZEB.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (all time) to 0.57 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
ZGQ.TO
ZEB.TO

Technology

38.4%

-

Healthcare

13.4%

-

Communication Services

13.3%

-

Industrials

11.2%

-

Consumer Defensive

9.3%

-

Financial Services

7.5%
100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

4.0%

-

Basic Materials

2.2%

-

Energy

0.4%

-

Real Estate

0.3%

-

Utilities

0.2%

-

Technology

ZGQ.TO
38.4%
ZEB.TO

-

Healthcare

ZGQ.TO
13.4%
ZEB.TO

-

Communication Services

ZGQ.TO
13.3%
ZEB.TO

-

Industrials

ZGQ.TO
11.2%
ZEB.TO

-

Consumer Defensive

ZGQ.TO
9.3%
ZEB.TO

-

Financial Services

ZGQ.TO
7.5%
ZEB.TO
100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ZGQ.TO
4.0%
ZEB.TO

-

Basic Materials

ZGQ.TO
2.2%
ZEB.TO

-

Energy

ZGQ.TO
0.4%
ZEB.TO

-

Real Estate

ZGQ.TO
0.3%
ZEB.TO

-

Utilities

ZGQ.TO
0.2%
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.

BMO MSCI All Country World High Quality Index ETF

BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF

Often compared with ZGQ.TO:
ZGQ.TO vs. XEQT.TOZGQ.TO vs. XWD.TOZGQ.TO vs. ZUQ.TOZGQ.TO vs. VFV.TOZGQ.TO vs. XAW.TOZGQ.TO vs. ZNQ.TOZGQ.TO vs. VOO
Often compared with ZEB.TO:
ZEB.TO vs. ZWB.TOZEB.TO vs. VDY.TOZEB.TO vs. HBNK.TOZEB.TO vs. HCAL.TOZEB.TO vs. HMAX.TOZEB.TO vs. ZSP.TOZEB.TO vs. XIC.TO

Return for Risk

ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZGQ.TO
ZGQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
ZGQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZGQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZGQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
ZGQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZGQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
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
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.

ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO MSCI All Country World High Quality Index ETF (ZGQ.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.

ZGQ.TOZEB.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.83
4.79

-2.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.57
6.54

-3.97

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.90

-0.55

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

7.17

-4.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.30

30.84

-19.55

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

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

The current ZGQ.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is lower than the ZEB.TO Sharpe Ratio of 4.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZGQ.TO and ZEB.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

ZGQ.TOZEB.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.83

4.79

-2.97

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

1.35

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.94

0.94

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.93

0.88

+0.04

Drawdowns

ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZGQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -26.68%, smaller than the maximum ZEB.TO drawdown of -39.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZGQ.TO and ZEB.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZGQ.TOZEB.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.68%

-39.69%

+13.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.22%

-8.44%

-0.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.36%

-14.80%

-3.56%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.68%

-25.97%

-0.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.68%

-39.69%

+13.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.17%

-2.00%

+0.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.49%

-5.65%

+1.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.27%

1.96%

+0.31%

Volatility

ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO MSCI All Country World High Quality Index ETF (ZGQ.TO) is 4.57%, while BMO Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (ZEB.TO) has a volatility of 4.89%. This indicates that ZGQ.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

ZGQ.TOZEB.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.57%

4.89%

-0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.49%

11.14%

+0.35%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.04%

12.62%

+1.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.83%

13.52%

+2.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.15%

16.91%

-0.76%

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

ZGQ.TO has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ZEB.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZGQ.TO vs. ZEB.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZGQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.49%, less than ZEB.TO's 2.54% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
ZGQ.TO
BMO MSCI All Country World High Quality Index ETF		0.49%0.60%0.90%1.33%1.34%0.86%0.99%1.10%1.51%1.09%1.35%1.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

ZGQ.TO and ZEB.TO have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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 0.50% for ZGQ.TO.

ZGQ.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while ZEB.TO is Financials Equities. ZGQ.TO tracks MSCI All Country World High Quality Index, while ZEB.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for ZGQ.TO and 0.25% for ZEB.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZGQ.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