ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ZMMK.TO (BMO Money Market Fund ETF Series) and XBAL.TO (iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio) are both exchange-traded funds - ZMMK.TO is a Money Market fund actively managed by BMO, while XBAL.TO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ZMMK.TO returned 3.85%/yr vs 14.11%/yr for XBAL.TO. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZMMK.TO charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XBAL.TO.

Performance

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Money Market Fund ETF Series (ZMMK.TO) and iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio (XBAL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZMMK.TO achieves a 0.99% return, which is significantly lower than XBAL.TO's 7.00% return.

ZMMK.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.19%
• YTD: 0.99%
• 6M: 1.15%
• 1Y: 2.48%
• 3Y*: 3.85%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XBAL.TO

• 1D: -1.00%
• 1M: 1.25%
• YTD: 7.00%
• 6M: 5.87%
• 1Y: 16.40%
• 3Y*: 14.11%
• 5Y*: 7.96%
• 10Y*: 7.64%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ZMMK.TO BMO Money Market Fund ETF Series	0.99%	2.77%	4.94%	4.86%	1.99%	0.04%
XBAL.TO iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio	7.00%	11.90%	15.80%	13.05%	-11.16%	0.76%

Correlation

The correlation between ZMMK.TO and XBAL.TO is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2021	0.03

The correlation between ZMMK.TO and XBAL.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.03 (all time) to 0.14 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ZMMK.TO

ZMMK.TO Risk / Return Rank: 99
ZMMK.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
ZMMK.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
ZMMK.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ZMMK.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
ZMMK.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 100

XBAL.TO

XBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 64
XBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
XBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
XBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
XBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
XBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Money Market Fund ETF Series (ZMMK.TO) and iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio (XBAL.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.

	ZMMK.TO	XBAL.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	9.19	1.92	+7.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	22.38	2.67	+19.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	5.37	1.36	+4.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	62.17	2.72	+59.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	353.74	11.39	+342.35
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZMMK.TO Sharpe Ratio is 9.19, which is higher than the XBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZMMK.TO and XBAL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZMMK.TO	XBAL.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.19	1.92	+7.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.91	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.79	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	10.21	0.65	+9.55

Drawdowns

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZMMK.TO drawdown since its inception was -0.16%, smaller than the maximum XBAL.TO drawdown of -28.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMMK.TO and XBAL.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZMMK.TO	XBAL.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.16%	-28.55%	+28.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.04%	-6.06%	+6.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.08%	-9.34%	+9.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.10%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.93%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.20%	+1.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.00%	-3.36%	+3.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.01%	1.44%	-1.43%

Volatility

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Money Market Fund ETF Series (ZMMK.TO) is 0.07%, while iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio (XBAL.TO) has a volatility of 3.07%. This indicates that ZMMK.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XBAL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZMMK.TO	XBAL.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.07%	3.07%	-3.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.19%	7.30%	-7.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27%	8.59%	-8.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.34%	8.81%	-8.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.34%	9.77%	-9.43%

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZMMK.TO has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than XBAL.TO's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

ZMMK.TO vs. XBAL.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZMMK.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, more than XBAL.TO's 2.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
XBAL.TO iShares Core Balanced ETF Portfolio	2.13%	2.27%	2.72%	2.43%	2.12%	1.78%	2.04%	2.31%	3.47%	3.00%	3.72%	3.38%
ZMMK.TO BMO Money Market Fund ETF Series	2.53%	3.02%	4.66%	4.98%	1.95%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZMMK.TO and XBAL.TO in my portfolio?

ZMMK.TO and XBAL.TO have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZMMK.TO or XBAL.TO?

On fees, ZMMK.TO is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZMMK.TO or XBAL.TO?

ZMMK.TO is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XBAL.TO.

What is the main difference between ZMMK.TO and XBAL.TO?

ZMMK.TO is categorized as Money Market, while XBAL.TO is Diversified Portfolio. They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for ZMMK.TO and 0.20% for XBAL.TO.