ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

ZPW.TO (BMO US Put Write ETF) and CNQE.TO (Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.14, they often move in opposite directions. ZPW.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CNQE.TO.

Performance

ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO US Put Write ETF (ZPW.TO) and Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF (CNQE.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZPW.TO achieves a 6.43% return, which is significantly lower than CNQE.TO's 27.00% return.

ZPW.TO

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 2.16%
• 6M: 5.42%
• YTD: 6.43%
• 1Y: 13.56%
• 3Y*: 11.83%
• 5Y*: 9.30%
• 10Y*: 6.21%

CNQE.TO

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 0.78%
• 6M: 25.15%
• YTD: 27.00%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZPW.TO BMO US Put Write ETF	6.43%	4.63%
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF	27.00%	15.75%

Correlation

The correlation between ZPW.TO and CNQE.TO is -0.14, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2025	-0.14

Return for Risk

ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZPW.TO

ZPW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 66
ZPW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
ZPW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
ZPW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 76
ZPW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
ZPW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 51

CNQE.TO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO US Put Write ETF (ZPW.TO) and Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF (CNQE.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.

	ZPW.TO	CNQE.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.88	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.59	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.43	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.90	—	—

Drawdowns

ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZPW.TO drawdown since its inception was -23.77%, which is greater than CNQE.TO's maximum drawdown of -22.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZPW.TO and CNQE.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZPW.TO	CNQE.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.77%	-22.31%	-1.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.61%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.35%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.57%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-23.77%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-14.41%	+14.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.05%	-5.68%	+1.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ZPW.TO	CNQE.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.61%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.19%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.24%	33.74%	-26.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.62%	33.74%	-23.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.72%	33.74%	-22.02%

ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZPW.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CNQE.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZPW.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZPW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.43%, less than CNQE.TO's 12.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF	12.13%	4.42%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ZPW.TO BMO US Put Write ETF	9.43%	9.55%	9.18%	7.57%	8.20%	7.24%	7.61%	7.17%	6.61%	6.82%	7.32%	2.32%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZPW.TO and CNQE.TO in my portfolio?

ZPW.TO and CNQE.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, ZPW.TO or CNQE.TO?

On fees, CNQE.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZPW.TO or CNQE.TO?

CNQE.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ZPW.TO.

What is the main difference between ZPW.TO and CNQE.TO?

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ZPW.TO and 0.40% for CNQE.TO.