ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO
ZUCM.TO (BMO USD Cash Management ETF) and CCAD.TO (CIBC Premium Cash Management ETF) are both Money Market funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ZUCM.TO returned 5.72% vs 2.56% for CCAD.TO. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.14% expense ratio.
Performance
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZUCM.TO achieves a 2.88% return, which is significantly higher than CCAD.TO's 0.98% return.
ZUCM.TO
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 2.35%
- YTD
- 2.88%
- 6M
- 1.35%
- 1Y
- 5.72%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CCAD.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 0.98%
- 6M
- 1.18%
- 1Y
- 2.56%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZUCM.TO BMO USD Cash Management ETF | 2.88% | 0.67% |
CCAD.TO CIBC Premium Cash Management ETF | 0.98% | 1.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZUCM.TO and CCAD.TO is -0.04, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2025 | -0.06 |
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
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZUCM.TO
CCAD.TO
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO USD Cash Management ETF (ZUCM.TO) and CIBC Premium Cash Management ETF (CCAD.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.
| ZUCM.TO | CCAD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -13.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 3.64 | -2.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.56 | 32.24 | -30.68 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.15 | 169.88 | -165.73 |
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
| ZUCM.TO | CCAD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.30 | 7.23 | -5.93 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.03 | 7.33 | -6.29 |
Drawdowns
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZUCM.TO drawdown since its inception was -5.81%, which is greater than CCAD.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZUCM.TO and CCAD.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZUCM.TO | CCAD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.81% | -0.08% | -5.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.69% | -0.08% | -3.61% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.72% | -0.01% | -1.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.38% | 0.02% | +1.36% |
Volatility
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO - Volatility Comparison
BMO USD Cash Management ETF (ZUCM.TO) has a higher volatility of 0.75% compared to CIBC Premium Cash Management ETF (CCAD.TO) at 0.06%. This indicates that ZUCM.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCAD.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZUCM.TO | CCAD.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.75% | 0.06% | +0.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.23% | 0.19% | +3.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.43% | 0.36% | +4.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.34% | 0.35% | +4.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.34% | 0.35% | +4.99% |
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both ZUCM.TO and CCAD.TO have an expense ratio of 0.14%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
ZUCM.TO vs. CCAD.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZUCM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.81%, more than CCAD.TO's 2.63% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CCAD.TO CIBC Premium Cash Management ETF | 2.63% | 1.62% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZUCM.TO BMO USD Cash Management ETF | 3.81% | 4.19% | 4.88% | 1.40% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZUCM.TO and CCAD.TO have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.14% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZUCM.TO and CCAD.TO have the same expense ratio: 0.14% per year.
They also come from different issuers: BMO and CIBC.
Find the right allocation for ZUCM.TO and CCAD.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