ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO
ZUQ.TO (BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF) and CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - ZUQ.TO tracks the MSCI USA Quality Index while CLU.NEO tracks the FTSE RAFI US 1000 Canadian Dollar Hedged Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ZUQ.TO returned 16.38%/yr vs 11.02%/yr for CLU.NEO. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZUQ.TO charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CLU.NEO.
Performance
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZUQ.TO achieves a 9.39% return, which is significantly higher than CLU.NEO's 8.69% return. Over the past 10 years, ZUQ.TO has outperformed CLU.NEO with an annualized return of 16.38%, while CLU.NEO has yielded a comparatively lower 11.02% annualized return.
ZUQ.TO
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- 5.91%
- YTD
- 9.39%
- 6M
- 3.18%
- 1Y
- 19.10%
- 3Y*
- 20.39%
- 5Y*
- 15.26%
- 10Y*
- 16.38%
CLU.NEO
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.48%
- YTD
- 8.69%
- 6M
- 10.24%
- 1Y
- 25.16%
- 3Y*
- 16.95%
- 5Y*
- 9.30%
- 10Y*
- 11.02%
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ZUQ.TO BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF | 9.39% | 5.78% | 34.02% | 33.24% | -18.33% | 26.40% | 19.92% | 31.74% | 4.70% | 16.90% |
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 8.69% | 15.20% | 14.82% | 13.13% | -9.37% | 31.13% | 3.57% | 25.41% | -11.16% | 14.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZUQ.TO and CLU.NEO is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 14, 2014 | 0.42 |
The correlation between ZUQ.TO and CLU.NEO shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (all time) to 0.55 (1 year), 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
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
ZUQ.TO
CLU.NEO
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF (ZUQ.TO) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO). 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.
| ZUQ.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.94 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.54 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.81 | 3.86 | -2.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.87 | 14.84 | -8.97 |
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
| ZUQ.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.56 | 2.50 | -0.94 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.94 | 0.64 | +0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.94 | 0.61 | +0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.94 | 0.61 | +0.32 |
Drawdowns
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZUQ.TO drawdown since its inception was -26.94%, smaller than the maximum CLU.NEO drawdown of -39.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZUQ.TO and CLU.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZUQ.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.94% | -39.93% | +12.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.57% | -6.55% | -4.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.93% | -16.57% | -1.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.94% | -20.66% | -6.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -26.94% | -39.93% | +12.99% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.10% | -0.70% | +0.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.60% | -4.74% | +0.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.26% | 1.70% | +1.56% |
Volatility
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Volatility Comparison
BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF (ZUQ.TO) and iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) have volatilities of 2.31% and 2.30%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZUQ.TO | CLU.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.31% | 2.30% | +0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.60% | 7.24% | +2.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.29% | 10.11% | +2.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.35% | 14.54% | +1.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.52% | 18.08% | -0.56% |
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZUQ.TO has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than CLU.NEO's 0.72% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZUQ.TO vs. CLU.NEO - Dividend Comparison
ZUQ.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%, less than CLU.NEO's 1.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 1.20% | 1.31% | 1.32% | 1.35% | 1.63% | 1.19% | 1.66% | 1.46% | 1.77% | 1.46% | 1.63% | 1.87% |
ZUQ.TO BMO MSCI USA High Quality Index ETF | 0.43% | 0.46% | 0.57% | 0.86% | 0.99% | 0.80% | 0.96% | 0.96% | 1.07% | 1.16% | 1.00% | 0.88% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZUQ.TO and CLU.NEO have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ZUQ.TO is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ZUQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
ZUQ.TO tracks MSCI USA Quality Index, while CLU.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI US 1000 Canadian Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for ZUQ.TO and 0.72% for CLU.NEO.
Find the right allocation for ZUQ.TO and CLU.NEO
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