PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) and IEFA (iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO, while IEFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net). ZLB.TO is actively managed, while IEFA is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZLB.TO returned 10.66%/yr vs 10.86%/yr for IEFA. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ZLB.TO charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IEFA.

Performance

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - 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 Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ZLB.TO is traded in CAD, while IEFA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IEFA 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 5.69% return, which is significantly lower than IEFA's 11.85% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ZLB.TO having a 10.66% annualized return and IEFA not far ahead at 10.86%.

ZLB.TO

1D
0.11%
1M
4.51%
YTD
5.69%
6M
2.84%
1Y
13.21%
3Y*
15.21%
5Y*
11.24%
10Y*
10.66%

IEFA

1D
0.47%
1M
2.99%
YTD
11.85%
6M
12.78%
1Y
23.73%
3Y*
18.09%
5Y*
11.29%
10Y*
10.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZLB.TO
BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF		5.69%20.40%15.31%9.41%-0.35%22.93%1.51%21.92%-2.76%11.11%
IEFA
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF		11.85%26.05%12.01%15.15%-9.87%11.58%5.61%17.59%-6.93%18.00%

Correlation

The correlation between ZLB.TO and IEFA is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.38

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

0.50

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

0.52

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

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2012

0.50

The correlation between ZLB.TO and IEFA shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.52 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ZLB.TO
IEFA

Financial Services

23.9%
22.5%

Consumer Defensive

18.3%
6.6%

Utilities

17.6%
3.6%

Industrials

10.0%
20.1%

Communication Services

9.3%
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

8.5%
8.0%

Basic Materials

6.2%
7.0%

Real Estate

4.3%
3.0%

Technology

1.9%
10.8%

Energy

-

3.8%

Healthcare

-

9.5%

Financial Services

ZLB.TO
23.9%
IEFA
22.5%

Consumer Defensive

ZLB.TO
18.3%
IEFA
6.6%

Utilities

ZLB.TO
17.6%
IEFA
3.6%

Industrials

ZLB.TO
10.0%
IEFA
20.1%

Communication Services

ZLB.TO
9.3%
IEFA
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

ZLB.TO
8.5%
IEFA
8.0%

Basic Materials

ZLB.TO
6.2%
IEFA
7.0%

Real Estate

ZLB.TO
4.3%
IEFA
3.0%

Technology

ZLB.TO
1.9%
IEFA
10.8%

Energy

ZLB.TO

-

IEFA
3.8%

Healthcare

ZLB.TO

-

IEFA
9.5%

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 Core MSCI 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. XEG.TO
Often compared with IEFA:
IEFA vs. VEAIEFA vs. VXUSIEFA vs. EFAIEFA vs. FSPSXIEFA vs. IEMGIEFA vs. XEF.TOIEFA vs. IXUS

Return for Risk

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA — 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: 4848
Overall Rank
ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
IEFA
IEFA Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
IEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
IEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
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. IEFA - 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 Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

ZLB.TOIEFADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.44
1.49

-0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.96
2.15

-0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.27

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.34

2.12

+0.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.85

8.13

-1.29

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the IEFA Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZLB.TO and IEFA, 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...

Drawdowns

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZLB.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.96%, which is greater than IEFA's maximum drawdown of -29.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZLB.TO and IEFA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZLB.TOIEFADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.96%

-29.92%

-4.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.67%

-11.27%

+5.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.01%

-14.32%

+6.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.00%

-24.68%

+11.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.96%

-29.92%

-4.04%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.49%

-4.52%

+2.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.93%

2.94%

-1.01%

Volatility

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) is 2.63%, while iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) has a volatility of 5.66%. This indicates that ZLB.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZLB.TOIEFADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.63%

5.66%

-3.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.60%

13.45%

-5.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.26%

15.97%

-6.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.62%

17.64%

-8.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.22%

18.40%

-6.18%

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZLB.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than IEFA's 0.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZLB.TO vs. IEFA - Dividend Comparison

ZLB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.88%, less than IEFA's 3.24% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IEFA
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF		3.24%3.55%3.47%3.20%2.70%3.32%1.90%3.18%3.46%2.57%2.96%2.63%
ZLB.TO
BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF		1.88%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 IEFA have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IEFA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IEFA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ZLB.TO.

ZLB.TO is categorized as Canada Equities, while IEFA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ZLB.TO and 0.07% for IEFA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZLB.TO and IEFA

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