ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO
ZST.TO (BMO Ultra Short-Term Bond ETF) and HFR.TO (Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZST.TO returned 2.37%/yr vs 3.30%/yr for HFR.TO. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZST.TO charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for HFR.TO.
Performance
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZST.TO achieves a 1.35% return, which is significantly lower than HFR.TO's 1.57% return. Over the past 10 years, ZST.TO has underperformed HFR.TO with an annualized return of 2.37%, while HFR.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 3.30% annualized return.
ZST.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.19%
- 6M
- 1.27%
- YTD
- 1.35%
- 1Y
- 1.72%
- 3Y*
- 3.79%
- 5Y*
- 3.04%
- 10Y*
- 2.37%
HFR.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.19%
- 6M
- 1.37%
- YTD
- 1.57%
- 1Y
- 3.38%
- 3Y*
- 5.50%
- 5Y*
- 3.90%
- 10Y*
- 3.30%
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZST.TO BMO Ultra Short-Term Bond ETF | 1.35% | 2.06% | 5.21% | 5.38% | 1.22% | 0.24% | 1.77% | 2.39% | 1.99% | 1.47% |
HFR.TO Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF | 1.57% | 4.04% | 6.89% | 7.86% | -0.77% | 0.68% | 3.52% | 4.41% | 0.84% | 2.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZST.TO and HFR.TO is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2011 | 0.06 |
The correlation between ZST.TO and HFR.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.18 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZST.TO
HFR.TO
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Ultra Short-Term Bond ETF (ZST.TO) and Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.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.
| ZST.TO | HFR.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.85 | 1.65 | +0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.72 | 8.47 | -6.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.62 | 32.37 | -27.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZST.TO drawdown since its inception was -3.60%, smaller than the maximum HFR.TO drawdown of -22.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZST.TO and HFR.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZST.TO | HFR.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.60% | -22.56% | +18.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.01% | -0.40% | -0.61% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.01% | -0.52% | -0.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -1.01% | -3.51% | +2.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -1.06% | -22.56% | +21.50% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -0.10% | +0.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.58% | -0.38% | -0.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.37% | 0.11% | +0.26% |
Volatility
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for BMO Ultra Short-Term Bond ETF (ZST.TO) is 0.11%, while Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.TO) has a volatility of 0.30%. This indicates that ZST.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HFR.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZST.TO | HFR.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.11% | 0.30% | -0.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.25% | 0.88% | -0.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.09% | 1.25% | -0.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.72% | 1.79% | -1.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.70% | 5.78% | -5.08% |
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZST.TO has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than HFR.TO's 0.46% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZST.TO vs. HFR.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZST.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, less than HFR.TO's 3.63% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HFR.TO Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF | 3.63% | 3.76% | 4.50% | 5.67% | 3.40% | 1.28% | 2.69% | 2.60% | 2.36% | 2.12% | 2.00% | 2.14% |
ZST.TO BMO Ultra Short-Term Bond ETF | 2.54% | 2.85% | 4.70% | 4.84% | 2.78% | 2.31% | 2.68% | 2.84% | 3.47% | 4.09% | 3.96% | 3.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZST.TO and HFR.TO have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZST.TO is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZST.TO is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for HFR.TO.
They also come from different issuers: BMO and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for ZST.TO and 0.46% for HFR.TO.
Find the right allocation for ZST.TO and HFR.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