ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO
ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) and NNRG.NEO (Ninepoint Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO, while NNRG.NEO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index. ZLB.TO is actively managed, while NNRG.NEO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ZLB.TO returned 11.81%/yr vs 33.81%/yr for NNRG.NEO. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZLB.TO charges 0.39%/yr vs 1.79%/yr for NNRG.NEO.
Performance
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZLB.TO achieves a 4.04% return, which is significantly lower than NNRG.NEO's 45.59% return.
ZLB.TO
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- 1.80%
- YTD
- 4.04%
- 6M
- 4.91%
- 1Y
- 16.44%
- 3Y*
- 15.72%
- 5Y*
- 11.81%
- 10Y*
- 10.79%
NNRG.NEO
- 1D
- 1.60%
- 1M
- -1.33%
- YTD
- 45.59%
- 6M
- 38.09%
- 1Y
- 66.96%
- 3Y*
- 26.11%
- 5Y*
- 33.81%
- 10Y*
- —
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZLB.TO BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF | 4.04% | 25.29% | 15.31% | 9.41% | -0.35% | 9.35% |
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF | 45.59% | 19.14% | 13.26% | -4.21% | 66.18% | 55.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZLB.TO and NNRG.NEO is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2021 | 0.15 |
The correlation between ZLB.TO and NNRG.NEO shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to 0.15 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
Financial Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
-
Financial Services
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Consumer Defensive
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Utilities
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Industrials
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Communication Services
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Consumer Cyclical
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Basic Materials
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Real Estate
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Technology
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
-
Energy
ZLB.TO
-
NNRG.NEO
Healthcare
ZLB.TO
-
NNRG.NEO
-
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
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
ZLB.TO
NNRG.NEO
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) and Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO). 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.TO | NNRG.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.45 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.08 | 6.21 | -3.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.43 | 13.09 | -1.66 |
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
| ZLB.TO | NNRG.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.99 | 2.74 | -0.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.26 | 0.98 | +0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.89 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.15 | 1.07 | +0.08 |
Drawdowns
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZLB.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.96%, smaller than the maximum NNRG.NEO drawdown of -35.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZLB.TO and NNRG.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZLB.TO | NNRG.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.96% | -35.78% | +1.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.36% | -10.84% | +5.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.01% | -23.52% | +15.51% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.00% | -35.78% | +22.78% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.84% | -4.70% | +3.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.46% | -9.58% | +7.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.44% | 5.13% | -3.69% |
Volatility
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) is 2.57%, while Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) has a volatility of 10.24%. This indicates that ZLB.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NNRG.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZLB.TO | NNRG.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.57% | 10.24% | -7.67% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.39% | 20.69% | -14.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.31% | 24.53% | -16.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.44% | 34.60% | -25.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.15% | 34.56% | -22.41% |
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZLB.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than NNRG.NEO's 1.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZLB.TO vs. NNRG.NEO - Dividend Comparison
ZLB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, more than NNRG.NEO's 0.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF | 0.51% | 0.37% | 0.39% | 0.38% | 9.08% | 1.92% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZLB.TO BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF | 1.87% | 1.93% | 2.37% | 2.67% | 2.66% | 2.39% | 2.83% | 2.44% | 2.76% | 2.52% | 2.94% | 2.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZLB.TO and NNRG.NEO have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZLB.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZLB.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 1.79% for NNRG.NEO.
ZLB.TO is categorized as Canada Equities, while NNRG.NEO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Ninepoint. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ZLB.TO and 1.79% for NNRG.NEO.
Find the right allocation for ZLB.TO and NNRG.NEO
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