PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO

Last updated Jul 17, 2026
Documentation

ZLH.TO (BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF) and MULC.TO (Manulife Multifactor U.S. Large Cap Index ETF Hedged) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, ZLH.TO returned 6.51%/yr vs 10.06%/yr for MULC.TO. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.TO) and Manulife Multifactor U.S. Large Cap Index ETF Hedged (MULC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZLH.TO achieves a 9.24% return, which is significantly lower than MULC.TO's 10.32% return.

ZLH.TO

1D
1.38%
1M
0.91%
6M
6.33%
YTD
9.24%
1Y
9.74%
3Y*
8.69%
5Y*
6.51%
10Y*
7.35%

MULC.TO

1D
-0.22%
1M
-0.23%
6M
7.90%
YTD
10.32%
1Y
19.95%
3Y*
16.44%
5Y*
10.06%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZLH.TO
BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF		9.24%5.90%10.95%-2.11%0.20%22.07%2.34%25.20%-1.85%7.34%
MULC.TO
Manulife Multifactor U.S. Large Cap Index ETF Hedged		10.32%13.42%18.78%18.95%-16.59%27.01%12.62%30.40%-8.43%12.69%

Correlation

The correlation between ZLH.TO and MULC.TO is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.17

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

0.22

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

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 17, 2017

0.26

The correlation between ZLH.TO and MULC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (1 year) to 0.29 (5 years), 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 US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF

Manulife Multifactor U.S. Large Cap Index ETF Hedged

Often compared with ZLH.TO:
ZLH.TO vs. ESGY.TOZLH.TO vs. TULV.TOZLH.TO vs. ZLU.TOZLH.TO vs. XTOT.TOZLH.TO vs. TPU.TOZLH.TO vs. XMS.TOZLH.TO vs. SMVP.TO
Often compared with MULC.TO:
MULC.TO vs. MCLC.TOMULC.TO vs. MCSM.TOMULC.TO vs. MINT.TOMULC.TO vs. MUMC.TOMULC.TO vs. MUSC.TOMULC.TO vs. CDIV.TOMULC.TO vs. FLUS.TO

Return for Risk

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZLH.TO
ZLH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
ZLH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZLH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZLH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
ZLH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZLH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
MULC.TO
MULC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
MULC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MULC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
MULC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
MULC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
MULC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.TO) and Manulife Multifactor U.S. Large Cap Index ETF Hedged (MULC.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.

ZLH.TOMULC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.90
1.65

-0.75

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.22
2.54

-1.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.33

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.33

2.41

-1.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.22

10.59

-7.37

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZLH.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.90, which is lower than the MULC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZLH.TO and MULC.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

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZLH.TO drawdown since its inception was -33.34%, smaller than the maximum MULC.TO drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZLH.TO and MULC.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZLH.TOMULC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.34%

-35.21%

+1.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.35%

-8.32%

+0.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.17%

-18.10%

+7.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.66%

-25.00%

+10.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.34%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.98%

-0.74%

-1.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.90%

-5.17%

+1.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.03%

1.89%

+1.14%

Volatility

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF (ZLH.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.67% compared to Manulife Multifactor U.S. Large Cap Index ETF Hedged (MULC.TO) at 2.88%. This indicates that ZLH.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MULC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZLH.TOMULC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.67%

2.88%

+1.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.88%

9.94%

-2.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.89%

12.15%

-1.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.29%

15.51%

-3.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.84%

18.16%

-4.32%

Dividends

ZLH.TO vs. MULC.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZLH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, more than MULC.TO's 0.80% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
MULC.TO
Manulife Multifactor U.S. Large Cap Index ETF Hedged		0.80%0.85%0.85%0.83%1.39%0.77%1.36%1.21%1.39%0.00%0.00%
ZLH.TO
BMO Low Volatility US Equity Hedged to CAD ETF		1.74%1.92%2.25%2.45%2.12%1.84%1.95%1.55%2.00%1.93%2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

ZLH.TO and MULC.TO have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Manulife.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZLH.TO and MULC.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