PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

ZLB.TO vs. QDF

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

ZLB.TO (BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF) and QDF (FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ZLB.TO is a Canada Equities fund actively managed by BMO, while QDF is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Northern Trust Quality Dividend Index. ZLB.TO is actively managed, while QDF is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZLB.TO returned 10.66%/yr vs 13.26%/yr for QDF. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ZLB.TO charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.37%/yr for QDF.

Performance

ZLB.TO vs. QDF - 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 FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ZLB.TO is traded in CAD, while QDF is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the QDF 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 QDF's 12.65% return. Over the past 10 years, ZLB.TO has underperformed QDF with an annualized return of 10.66%, while QDF has yielded a comparatively higher 13.26% annualized return.

ZLB.TO

1D
0.11%
1M
4.05%
YTD
5.69%
6M
2.84%
1Y
13.46%
3Y*
15.21%
5Y*
11.24%
10Y*
10.66%

QDF

1D
1.03%
1M
3.47%
YTD
12.65%
6M
11.55%
1Y
30.98%
3Y*
20.05%
5Y*
15.04%
10Y*
13.26%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZLB.TO vs. QDF - 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%
QDF
FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund		12.65%11.25%26.86%16.86%-6.56%26.58%2.37%20.53%-0.24%9.47%

Correlation

The correlation between ZLB.TO and QDF is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.35

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

0.44

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

0.51

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

0.51

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2012

0.51

The correlation between ZLB.TO and QDF shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (1 year) to 0.51 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ZLB.TO vs. QDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ZLB.TO
QDF

Financial Services

23.9%
11.5%

Consumer Defensive

18.3%
5.7%

Utilities

17.6%
1.8%

Industrials

10.0%
9.1%

Communication Services

9.3%
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

8.5%
6.4%

Basic Materials

6.2%
0.4%

Real Estate

4.3%
5.4%

Technology

1.9%
39.5%

Energy

-

3.4%

Healthcare

-

9.6%

Financial Services

ZLB.TO
23.9%
QDF
11.5%

Consumer Defensive

ZLB.TO
18.3%
QDF
5.7%

Utilities

ZLB.TO
17.6%
QDF
1.8%

Industrials

ZLB.TO
10.0%
QDF
9.1%

Communication Services

ZLB.TO
9.3%
QDF
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

ZLB.TO
8.5%
QDF
6.4%

Basic Materials

ZLB.TO
6.2%
QDF
0.4%

Real Estate

ZLB.TO
4.3%
QDF
5.4%

Technology

ZLB.TO
1.9%
QDF
39.5%

Energy

ZLB.TO

-

QDF
3.4%

Healthcare

ZLB.TO

-

QDF
9.6%

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

FlexShares Quality Dividend Index 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. XEG.TO
Often compared with QDF:
QDF vs. QDEFQDF vs. SCHDQDF vs. DGRWQDF vs. QQQQDF vs. FDVVQDF vs. SPHDQDF vs. VOO

Return for Risk

ZLB.TO vs. QDF — 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
QDF
QDF Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
QDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDF Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
QDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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. QDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) and FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF). 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.TOQDFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.44
2.30

-0.86

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.96
3.24

-1.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.40

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.34

4.35

-2.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.85

16.40

-9.55

ZLB.TO vs. QDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZLB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is lower than the QDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZLB.TO and QDF, 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. QDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZLB.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.96%, which is greater than QDF's maximum drawdown of -31.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZLB.TO and QDF.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZLB.TOQDFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.96%

-31.10%

-2.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.67%

-6.63%

+0.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.01%

-18.64%

+10.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.00%

-18.64%

+5.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.96%

-31.10%

-2.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.08%

+0.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.49%

-3.30%

+0.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.93%

1.76%

+0.17%

Volatility

ZLB.TO vs. QDF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Low Volatility Canadian Equity ETF (ZLB.TO) is 2.63%, while FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) has a volatility of 4.33%. This indicates that ZLB.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZLB.TOQDFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.63%

4.33%

-1.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.60%

9.81%

-2.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.26%

12.51%

-3.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.62%

16.69%

-7.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.22%

18.45%

-6.23%

ZLB.TO vs. QDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZLB.TO has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than QDF's 0.37% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZLB.TO vs. QDF - Dividend Comparison

ZLB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.88%, more than QDF's 1.50% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QDF
FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund		1.50%1.65%1.93%2.19%2.45%1.90%2.38%3.05%4.29%2.70%3.07%3.04%
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 QDF have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QDF is cheaper at 0.37% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QDF is cheaper with a 0.37% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ZLB.TO.

ZLB.TO is categorized as Canada Equities, while QDF is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and FlexShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ZLB.TO and 0.37% for QDF.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZLB.TO and QDF

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