PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO

Last updated Jul 17, 2026
Documentation

ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) and PFIA.TO (Picton Mahoney Fortified Income Alternative Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO, while PFIA.TO is a fund fund. Over the past 5 years, ZLB.TO returned 11.61%/yr vs 3.42%/yr for PFIA.TO. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO - 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 Picton Mahoney Fortified Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZLB.TO achieves a 8.92% return, which is significantly higher than PFIA.TO's 1.05% return.

ZLB.TO

1D
0.95%
1M
2.18%
6M
7.67%
YTD
8.92%
1Y
14.23%
3Y*
15.74%
5Y*
11.61%
10Y*
10.65%

PFIA.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.13%
6M
0.66%
YTD
1.05%
1Y
3.59%
3Y*
5.96%
5Y*
3.42%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
ZLB.TO
BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF		8.92%20.40%15.31%9.41%-0.35%22.93%1.51%2.77%
PFIA.TO
Picton Mahoney Fortified Income Alternative Fund		1.05%5.42%7.76%7.26%-3.42%3.17%9.26%3.58%

Correlation

The correlation between ZLB.TO and PFIA.TO is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

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

-0.06

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

-0.01

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

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2019

0.05

The correlation between ZLB.TO and PFIA.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (1 year) to 0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Picton Mahoney Fortified Income Alternative Fund

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. ZWC.TO
Often compared with PFIA.TO:
PFIA.TO vs. PMIF.TOPFIA.TO vs. PFMN.TOPFIA.TO vs. CASH.TOPFIA.TO vs. VSBIXPFIA.TO vs. VDY.TOPFIA.TO vs. XBAL.TOPFIA.TO vs. BSV

Return for Risk

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO — 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: 5757
Overall Rank
ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZLB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO
PFIA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
PFIA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
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. PFIA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) and Picton Mahoney Fortified Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.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.

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.TOPFIA.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.54
1.48

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.09
2.19

-0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.29

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.52

2.66

-0.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.36

7.44

-0.08

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is comparable to the PFIA.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZLB.TO and PFIA.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...

Drawdowns

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZLB.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.96%, which is greater than PFIA.TO's maximum drawdown of -17.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZLB.TO and PFIA.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZLB.TOPFIA.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.96%

-17.12%

-16.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.67%

-1.36%

-4.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.01%

-1.47%

-6.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.00%

-6.46%

-6.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.96%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.47%

-1.11%

-1.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.94%

0.48%

+1.46%

Volatility

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.19% compared to Picton Mahoney Fortified Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) at 0.61%. This indicates that ZLB.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFIA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZLB.TOPFIA.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.19%

0.61%

+1.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.66%

1.93%

+4.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.29%

2.43%

+6.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.65%

4.19%

+5.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.22%

6.36%

+5.86%

Dividends

ZLB.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZLB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, less than PFIA.TO's 4.66% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
PFIA.TO
Picton Mahoney Fortified Income Alternative Fund		4.66%3.97%3.66%5.63%4.69%4.25%6.02%1.66%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ZLB.TO
BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF		1.81%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 PFIA.TO have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZLB.TO and PFIA.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