ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO
ZWC.TO (BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF) and CNQE.TO (Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZWC.TO charges 0.91%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CNQE.TO.
Performance
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZWC.TO achieves a 11.12% return, which is significantly lower than CNQE.TO's 39.35% return.
ZWC.TO
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- 2.71%
- YTD
- 11.12%
- 6M
- 12.78%
- 1Y
- 28.05%
- 3Y*
- 17.17%
- 5Y*
- 11.09%
- 10Y*
- —
CNQE.TO
- 1D
- 1.83%
- 1M
- 3.29%
- YTD
- 39.35%
- 6M
- 37.15%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ZWC.TO BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF | 11.12% | 10.72% |
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF | 39.35% | 13.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZWC.TO and CNQE.TO is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2025 | 0.18 |
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
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO — Risk / Return Rank
ZWC.TO
CNQE.TO
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWC.TO) and Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF (CNQE.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.
| ZWC.TO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.61 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 5.11 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.69 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.71 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.23 | — | — |
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
| ZWC.TO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.61 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.10 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.56 | 2.48 | -1.93 |
Drawdowns
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZWC.TO drawdown since its inception was -40.57%, which is greater than CNQE.TO's maximum drawdown of -18.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZWC.TO and CNQE.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZWC.TO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.57% | -18.22% | -22.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.99% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.09% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.43% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.97% | -6.08% | +5.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.69% | -4.12% | -0.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.21% | — | — |
Volatility
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZWC.TO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.40% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.77% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.80% | 33.12% | -25.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.13% | 33.12% | -22.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.94% | 33.12% | -18.18% |
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZWC.TO has a 0.91% expense ratio, which is higher than CNQE.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
ZWC.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Dividend Comparison
ZWC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.64%, less than CNQE.TO's 9.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF | 9.40% | 4.42% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ZWC.TO BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF | 5.64% | 5.92% | 6.73% | 7.62% | 7.01% | 6.60% | 8.15% | 6.92% | 7.11% | 5.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZWC.TO and CNQE.TO have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNQE.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNQE.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.91% for ZWC.TO.
They also come from different issuers: BMO and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.91% for ZWC.TO and 0.40% for CNQE.TO.
Find the right allocation for ZWC.TO and CNQE.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