PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZLB.TO vs. EFAV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) and EFAV (iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO, while EFAV is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility Index. ZLB.TO is actively managed, while EFAV is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZLB.TO returned 10.42%/yr vs 7.07%/yr for EFAV. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZLB.TO charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for EFAV.

Performance

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) and iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ZLB.TO is traded in CAD, while EFAV is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EFAV values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZLB.TO achieves a 3.94% return, which is significantly lower than EFAV's 5.66% return. Over the past 10 years, ZLB.TO has outperformed EFAV with an annualized return of 10.42%, while EFAV has yielded a comparatively lower 7.07% annualized return.

ZLB.TO

1D
-0.71%
1M
1.46%
YTD
3.94%
6M
1.44%
1Y
12.65%
3Y*
14.61%
5Y*
10.98%
10Y*
10.42%

EFAV

1D
0.88%
1M
0.15%
YTD
5.66%
6M
6.98%
1Y
11.17%
3Y*
14.45%
5Y*
9.04%
10Y*
7.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZLB.TO
BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF		3.94%20.40%15.31%9.41%-0.35%22.93%1.51%21.92%-2.76%11.11%
EFAV
iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF		5.66%20.25%14.22%9.84%-9.73%7.15%-2.43%11.87%2.19%13.97%

Correlation

The correlation between ZLB.TO and EFAV is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.39

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

0.48

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

0.50

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

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2011

0.47

The correlation between ZLB.TO and EFAV shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (1 year) to 0.50 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ZLB.TO
EFAV

Financial Services

23.9%
19.9%

Consumer Defensive

18.3%
11.5%

Utilities

17.6%
9.1%

Industrials

10.0%
15.1%

Communication Services

9.3%
9.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.5%
5.2%

Basic Materials

6.2%
1.6%

Real Estate

4.3%
2.9%

Technology

1.9%
4.5%

Energy

-

8.2%

Healthcare

-

12.4%

Financial Services

ZLB.TO
23.9%
EFAV
19.9%

Consumer Defensive

ZLB.TO
18.3%
EFAV
11.5%

Utilities

ZLB.TO
17.6%
EFAV
9.1%

Industrials

ZLB.TO
10.0%
EFAV
15.1%

Communication Services

ZLB.TO
9.3%
EFAV
9.7%

Consumer Cyclical

ZLB.TO
8.5%
EFAV
5.2%

Basic Materials

ZLB.TO
6.2%
EFAV
1.6%

Real Estate

ZLB.TO
4.3%
EFAV
2.9%

Technology

ZLB.TO
1.9%
EFAV
4.5%

Energy

ZLB.TO

-

EFAV
8.2%

Healthcare

ZLB.TO

-

EFAV
12.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF

iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF

Often compared with ZLB.TO:
ZLB.TO vs. VDY.TOZLB.TO vs. XIU.TOZLB.TO vs. XDIV.TOZLB.TO vs. XMW.TOZLB.TO vs. XBAL.TOZLB.TO vs. XUT.TOZLB.TO vs. XUU-U.TO
Often compared with EFAV:
EFAV vs. EFVEFAV vs. EFAEFAV vs. ACWVEFAV vs. EEMVEFAV vs. USMVEFAV vs. EFASEFAV vs. SPLV

Return for Risk

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZLB.TO
ZLB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank
EFAV
EFAV Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
EFAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFAV Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
EFAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFAV Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) and iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV). 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.

ZLB.TOEFAVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.38
0.98

+0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.89
1.43

+0.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.18

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.24

1.85

+0.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.56

5.02

+1.54

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

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is higher than the EFAV Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZLB.TO and EFAV, 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

ZLB.TOEFAVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.38

0.98

+0.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.15

0.68

+0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

0.48

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.11

0.62

+0.48

Drawdowns

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZLB.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.96%, which is greater than EFAV's maximum drawdown of -24.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZLB.TO and EFAV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZLB.TOEFAVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.96%

-24.54%

-9.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.67%

-6.05%

+0.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.01%

-8.27%

+0.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.00%

-21.95%

+8.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.96%

-24.54%

-9.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.94%

-3.81%

+2.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.49%

-4.00%

+1.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.93%

2.23%

-0.30%

Volatility

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) is 2.74%, while iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV) has a volatility of 3.14%. This indicates that ZLB.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EFAV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZLB.TOEFAVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.74%

3.14%

-0.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.54%

9.11%

-1.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.23%

11.52%

-2.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.62%

13.32%

-3.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.22%

14.77%

-2.55%

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZLB.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAV's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZLB.TO vs. EFAV - Dividend Comparison

ZLB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.91%, less than EFAV's 3.08% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EFAV
iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF		3.08%3.20%3.24%3.08%2.53%2.47%1.33%4.19%3.34%2.45%3.94%2.49%
ZLB.TO
BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF		1.91%1.99%2.37%2.67%2.66%2.39%2.83%2.44%2.76%2.55%2.94%2.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

ZLB.TO and EFAV have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EFAV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EFAV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ZLB.TO.

ZLB.TO is categorized as Canada Equities, while EFAV is Foreign Large Cap Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ZLB.TO and 0.20% for EFAV.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZLB.TO and EFAV

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