ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO
ZLU.TO (BMO Low Volatility US Equity ETF (CAD)) and CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ZLU.TO is actively managed, while CLU.NEO is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZLU.TO returned 9.43%/yr vs 11.02%/yr for CLU.NEO. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZLU.TO charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CLU.NEO.
Performance
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZLU.TO achieves a 9.40% return, which is significantly higher than CLU.NEO's 8.69% return. Over the past 10 years, ZLU.TO has underperformed CLU.NEO with an annualized return of 9.43%, while CLU.NEO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.02% annualized return.
ZLU.TO
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 4.18%
- YTD
- 9.40%
- 6M
- 3.31%
- 1Y
- 9.98%
- 3Y*
- 10.83%
- 5Y*
- 10.19%
- 10Y*
- 9.43%
CLU.NEO
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.48%
- YTD
- 8.69%
- 6M
- 10.24%
- 1Y
- 25.16%
- 3Y*
- 16.95%
- 5Y*
- 9.30%
- 10Y*
- 11.02%
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZLU.TO BMO Low Volatility US Equity ETF (CAD) | 9.40% | 1.95% | 21.52% | -3.36% | 7.85% | 20.62% | 1.98% | 20.39% | 8.31% | 4.98% |
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 8.69% | 15.20% | 14.82% | 13.13% | -9.37% | 31.13% | 3.57% | 25.41% | -11.16% | 14.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZLU.TO and CLU.NEO is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 9, 2013 | 0.30 |
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
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
ZLU.TO
CLU.NEO
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Low Volatility US Equity ETF (CAD) (ZLU.TO) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.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.
| ZLU.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.54 | -0.37 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.33 | 3.86 | -2.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.38 | 14.84 | -11.46 |
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
| ZLU.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.96 | 2.50 | -1.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | 0.64 | +0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.68 | 0.61 | +0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.97 | 0.61 | +0.36 |
Drawdowns
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZLU.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.49%, smaller than the maximum CLU.NEO drawdown of -39.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZLU.TO and CLU.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZLU.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.49% | -39.93% | +14.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.53% | -6.55% | -0.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.17% | -16.57% | +7.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.40% | -20.66% | +10.26% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.49% | -39.93% | +14.44% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.03% | -0.70% | -1.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.11% | -4.74% | +1.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.97% | 1.70% | +1.27% |
Volatility
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Volatility Comparison
BMO Low Volatility US Equity ETF (CAD) (ZLU.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.85% compared to iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) at 2.30%. This indicates that ZLU.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLU.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZLU.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.85% | 2.30% | +0.55% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.51% | 7.24% | +1.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.46% | 10.11% | +0.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.34% | 14.54% | -3.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.91% | 18.08% | -4.17% |
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZLU.TO has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than CLU.NEO's 0.72% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZLU.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Dividend Comparison
ZLU.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%, more than CLU.NEO's 1.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 1.20% | 1.31% | 1.32% | 1.35% | 1.63% | 1.19% | 1.66% | 1.46% | 1.77% | 1.46% | 1.63% | 1.87% |
ZLU.TO BMO Low Volatility US Equity ETF (CAD) | 1.73% | 1.89% | 1.89% | 2.29% | 1.87% | 1.69% | 1.75% | 1.51% | 1.81% | 1.91% | 2.26% | 1.73% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZLU.TO and CLU.NEO have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZLU.TO is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZLU.TO is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for ZLU.TO and 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
Find the right allocation for ZLU.TO and CLU.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