ZVC.TO vs. CGVV
ZVC.TO (BMO MSCI Canada Value Index ETF) and CGVV (Capital Group U.S. Large Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. ZVC.TO is passively managed, while CGVV is actively managed. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ZVC.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGVV.
Performance
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ZVC.TO is traded in CAD, while CGVV is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CGVV values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZVC.TO achieves a 16.23% return, which is significantly higher than CGVV's 12.94% return.
ZVC.TO
- 1D
- -0.32%
- 1M
- 4.99%
- YTD
- 16.23%
- 6M
- 18.05%
- 1Y
- 43.80%
- 3Y*
- 23.40%
- 5Y*
- 16.44%
- 10Y*
- —
CGVV
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 3.44%
- YTD
- 12.94%
- 6M
- 10.98%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZVC.TO BMO MSCI Canada Value Index ETF | 16.23% | 22.21% |
CGVV Capital Group U.S. Large Value ETF | 12.94% | 7.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZVC.TO and CGVV is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2025 | 0.53 |
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
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV — Risk / Return Rank
ZVC.TO
CGVV
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO MSCI Canada Value Index ETF (ZVC.TO) and Capital Group U.S. Large Value ETF (CGVV). 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.
| ZVC.TO | CGVV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.82 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.20 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 35.91 | — | — |
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
| ZVC.TO | CGVV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.27 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.23 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.70 | 1.72 | -1.02 |
Drawdowns
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZVC.TO drawdown since its inception was -41.00%, which is greater than CGVV's maximum drawdown of -8.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZVC.TO and CGVV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZVC.TO | CGVV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.00% | -8.45% | -32.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.34% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.17% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.32% | -0.47% | +0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.92% | -1.50% | -3.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.22% | — | — |
Volatility
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZVC.TO | CGVV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.20% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.14% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.32% | 13.15% | -2.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.46% | 13.15% | +0.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.30% | 13.15% | +4.15% |
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZVC.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CGVV's 0.33% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZVC.TO vs. CGVV - Dividend Comparison
ZVC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.95%, more than CGVV's 0.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGVV Capital Group U.S. Large Value ETF | 0.51% | 0.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZVC.TO BMO MSCI Canada Value Index ETF | 1.95% | 2.23% | 2.87% | 3.32% | 2.96% | 2.41% | 3.30% | 2.66% | 2.67% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZVC.TO and CGVV have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CGVV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CGVV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for ZVC.TO.
They also come from different issuers: BMO and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ZVC.TO and 0.33% for CGVV.
Find the right allocation for ZVC.TO and CGVV
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