PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZWB.TO (BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF) and XUSF.TO (iShares S&P U.S. Financials Index ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. ZWB.TO is actively managed, while XUSF.TO is passively managed. Over the past year, ZWB.TO returned 49.97% vs 2.22% for XUSF.TO. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZWB.TO charges 0.71%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XUSF.TO.

Performance

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.TO) and iShares S&P U.S. Financials Index ETF (XUSF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZWB.TO achieves a 16.23% return, which is significantly higher than XUSF.TO's -6.02% return.

ZWB.TO

1D
-0.31%
1M
5.06%
YTD
16.23%
6M
21.03%
1Y
49.97%
3Y*
25.69%
5Y*
13.82%
10Y*
12.24%

XUSF.TO

1D
-0.54%
1M
0.41%
YTD
-6.02%
6M
-4.57%
1Y
2.22%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
ZWB.TO
BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF		16.23%34.91%19.41%7.95%
XUSF.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Financials Index ETF		-6.02%9.67%39.77%8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between ZWB.TO and XUSF.TO is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 7, 2023

0.40

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF

iShares S&P U.S. Financials Index ETF

Often compared with ZWB.TO:
ZWB.TO vs. ZEB.TOZWB.TO vs. ZWC.TOZWB.TO vs. VDY.TOZWB.TO vs. VFV.TOZWB.TO vs. XDIV.TOZWB.TO vs. RBNK.TOZWB.TO vs. SRU-UN.TO
Often compared with XUSF.TO:
XUSF.TO vs. HBA.TOXUSF.TO vs. FMAX.TOXUSF.TO vs. XCG.TOXUSF.TO vs. XEQT.TOXUSF.TO vs. RBNK.TOXUSF.TO vs. ZEB.TOXUSF.TO vs. XCS.TO

Return for Risk

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ZWB.TO
ZWB.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
ZWB.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZWB.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
XUSF.TO
XUSF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1111
Overall Rank
XUSF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XUSF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
XUSF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
XUSF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
XUSF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.TO) and iShares S&P U.S. Financials Index ETF (XUSF.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.

ZWB.TOXUSF.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
4.44
0.15

+4.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
6.16
0.31

+5.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.86

1.04

+0.81

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.42

0.15

+6.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

28.83

0.37

+28.46

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZWB.TO Sharpe Ratio is 4.44, which is higher than the XUSF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZWB.TO and XUSF.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

ZWB.TOXUSF.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.44

0.15

+4.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.10

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.74

0.99

-0.25

Drawdowns

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZWB.TO drawdown since its inception was -39.36%, which is greater than XUSF.TO's maximum drawdown of -16.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZWB.TO and XUSF.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ZWB.TOXUSF.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.36%

-16.88%

-22.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.82%

-14.66%

+6.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.05%

—

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.26%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.36%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.85%

-8.87%

+7.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.56%

-3.50%

-2.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.74%

6.07%

-4.33%

Volatility

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF (ZWB.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.26% compared to iShares S&P U.S. Financials Index ETF (XUSF.TO) at 2.65%. This indicates that ZWB.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XUSF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ZWB.TOXUSF.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.26%

2.65%

+1.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.03%

11.50%

-1.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.31%

15.06%

-3.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.63%

17.90%

-5.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.68%

17.90%

-2.22%

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZWB.TO has a 0.71% expense ratio, which is higher than XUSF.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZWB.TO vs. XUSF.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZWB.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.02%, more than XUSF.TO's 0.91% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XUSF.TO
iShares S&P U.S. Financials Index ETF		0.91%0.75%0.81%0.34%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ZWB.TO
BMO Covered Call Canadian Banks ETF		5.02%5.38%6.66%7.62%7.30%5.46%5.80%5.53%5.59%4.80%5.04%5.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

ZWB.TO and XUSF.TO have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XUSF.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XUSF.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for ZWB.TO.

They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.71% for ZWB.TO and 0.25% for XUSF.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZWB.TO and XUSF.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