ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ZWG.TO (BMO Global 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 correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. ZWG.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CNQE.TO.

Performance

ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWG.TO) and Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF (CNQE.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZWG.TO achieves a 12.13% return, which is significantly lower than CNQE.TO's 38.88% return.

ZWG.TO

• 1D: 0.60%
• 1M: 7.11%
• YTD: 12.13%
• 6M: 8.81%
• 1Y: 23.47%
• 3Y*: 16.17%
• 5Y*: 10.89%
• 10Y*: —

CNQE.TO

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 1.72%
• YTD: 38.88%
• 6M: 34.99%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZWG.TO BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF	12.13%	3.70%
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF	38.88%	13.80%

Correlation

The correlation between ZWG.TO and CNQE.TO is -0.06, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2025	-0.06

Return for Risk

ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ZWG.TO

ZWG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 68
ZWG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
ZWG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
ZWG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 64
ZWG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
ZWG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWG.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.

	ZWG.TO	CNQE.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.08	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.43	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.15	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZWG.TO	CNQE.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.15	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	2.45	-2.24

Drawdowns

ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZWG.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.55%, 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 ZWG.TO and CNQE.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZWG.TO	CNQE.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.55%	-18.22%	-7.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.88%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.87%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-6.40%	+6.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.46%	-4.14%	+0.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ZWG.TO	CNQE.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.12%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.77%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.96%	33.04%	-22.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.71%	33.04%	-21.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	239.90%	33.04%	+206.86%

ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZWG.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CNQE.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZWG.TO vs. CNQE.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZWG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.84%, less than CNQE.TO's 9.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF	9.43%	4.42%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ZWG.TO BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF	5.84%	6.41%	6.48%	7.42%	7.23%	6.40%	6.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZWG.TO and CNQE.TO in my portfolio?

ZWG.TO and CNQE.TO have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZWG.TO or CNQE.TO?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZWG.TO or CNQE.TO?

CNQE.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ZWG.TO.

What is the main difference between ZWG.TO and CNQE.TO?

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ZWG.TO and 0.40% for CNQE.TO.