ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO
ZMI.TO (BMO Monthly Income ETF) and CEQP.TO (CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. ZMI.TO charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for CEQP.TO.
Performance
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ZMI.TO
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 4.20%
- YTD
- 9.38%
- 6M
- 6.03%
- 1Y
- 16.07%
- 3Y*
- 12.51%
- 5Y*
- 7.80%
- 10Y*
- 6.61%
CEQP.TO
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- 5.46%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ZMI.TO BMO Monthly Income ETF | 7.46% |
CEQP.TO CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF | 7.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZMI.TO and CEQP.TO is -0.02, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2026 | -0.02 |
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
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZMI.TO
CEQP.TO
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Monthly Income ETF (ZMI.TO) and CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF (CEQP.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.
| ZMI.TO | CEQP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.40 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.09 | — | — |
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
| ZMI.TO | CEQP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.27 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.05 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.75 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.77 | 1.37 | -0.60 |
Drawdowns
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZMI.TO drawdown since its inception was -26.65%, which is greater than CEQP.TO's maximum drawdown of -8.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMI.TO and CEQP.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZMI.TO | CEQP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.65% | -8.33% | -18.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.75% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.81% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.65% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -26.65% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.12% | -1.89% | -0.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.45% | — | — |
Volatility
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZMI.TO | CEQP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.26% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.81% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.10% | 16.40% | -9.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.43% | 16.40% | -8.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.87% | 16.40% | -7.53% |
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZMI.TO has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than CEQP.TO's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZMI.TO vs. CEQP.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZMI.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.92%, more than CEQP.TO's 0.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEQP.TO CI Equity+ Asset Allocation ETF | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZMI.TO BMO Monthly Income ETF | 3.92% | 4.54% | 4.68% | 4.94% | 4.49% | 3.71% | 4.21% | 4.24% | 4.58% | 4.06% | 3.89% | 3.89% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZMI.TO and CEQP.TO have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZMI.TO is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZMI.TO is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CEQP.TO.
They also come from different issuers: BMO and CI. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ZMI.TO and 0.30% for CEQP.TO.
Find the right allocation for ZMI.TO and CEQP.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