ZMT.TO vs. SETM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ZMT.TO (BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged)) and SETM (Sprott Critical Materials ETF) are both Materials funds - ZMT.TO tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Global Base Metals Index Canadian Dollar Hedged while SETM tracks the Nasdaq Sprott Critical Materials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ZMT.TO returned 35.09%/yr vs 28.27%/yr for SETM. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ZMT.TO charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for SETM.

Performance

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged) (ZMT.TO) and Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

ZMT.TO is traded in CAD, while SETM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the SETM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZMT.TO achieves a 24.75% return, which is significantly higher than SETM's 14.92% return.

ZMT.TO

• 1D: -3.72%
• 1M: -1.01%
• YTD: 24.75%
• 6M: 23.80%
• 1Y: 85.17%
• 3Y*: 35.09%
• 5Y*: 19.61%
• 10Y*: 15.85%

SETM

• 1D: -4.19%
• 1M: -5.59%
• YTD: 14.92%
• 6M: 12.22%
• 1Y: 101.13%
• 3Y*: 28.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ZMT.TO BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged)	24.75%	63.17%	15.30%	-2.94%
SETM Sprott Critical Materials ETF	14.92%	86.36%	-5.90%	-13.41%

Correlation

The correlation between ZMT.TO and SETM is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2023	0.61

The correlation between ZMT.TO and SETM shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (3 years) to 0.72 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ZMT.TO	SETM
Basic Materials	89.4%	76.0%
Industrials	10.6%	1.0%
Energy	3.7%	22.9%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	0.1%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ZMT.TO vs. SETM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZMT.TO

ZMT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 65
ZMT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
ZMT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ZMT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 59
ZMT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
ZMT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

SETM

SETM Risk / Return Rank: 61
SETM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
SETM Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
SETM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
SETM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
SETM Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged) (ZMT.TO) and Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM). 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.

	ZMT.TO	SETM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.19	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.53	2.52	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.33	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.60	4.06	-0.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.74	11.88	-1.13

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZMT.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the SETM Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZMT.TO and SETM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZMT.TO drawdown since its inception was -82.27%, which is greater than SETM's maximum drawdown of -40.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMT.TO and SETM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZMT.TO	SETM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-82.27%	-40.16%	-42.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.81%	-25.06%	+1.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.28%	-40.16%	+6.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.01%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-68.54%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.69%	-15.62%	+1.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-45.92%	-13.77%	-32.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.95%	8.54%	-0.59%

Volatility

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged) (ZMT.TO) is 15.54%, while Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM) has a volatility of 17.21%. This indicates that ZMT.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SETM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZMT.TO	SETM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.54%	17.21%	-1.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.05%	37.65%	-3.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.97%	46.50%	-5.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.18%	37.23%	-3.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.48%	37.23%	-3.75%

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZMT.TO has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than SETM's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZMT.TO vs. SETM - Dividend Comparison

ZMT.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, less than SETM's 1.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SETM Sprott Critical Materials ETF	1.41%	1.56%	2.07%	2.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ZMT.TO BMO S&P/TSX Equal Weight Global Base Metals (CAD Hedged)	0.17%	0.21%	0.34%	0.87%	1.46%	2.82%	1.03%	2.34%	0.79%	0.26%	0.25%	0.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZMT.TO and SETM in my portfolio?

ZMT.TO and SETM have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZMT.TO or SETM?

On fees, ZMT.TO is cheaper at 0.61% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZMT.TO or SETM?

ZMT.TO is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SETM.

What is the main difference between ZMT.TO and SETM?

ZMT.TO tracks Solactive Equal Weight Global Base Metals Index Canadian Dollar Hedged, while SETM tracks Nasdaq Sprott Critical Materials Index. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Sprott. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for ZMT.TO and 0.65% for SETM.