ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.TO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

ZWG.TO (BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF) and GLCC.TO (Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ZWG.TO returned 10.65%/yr vs 20.22%/yr for GLCC.TO. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZWG.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GLCC.TO.

Performance

ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.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 Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.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 11.82% return, which is significantly higher than GLCC.TO's -5.15% return.

ZWG.TO

• 1D: 0.72%
• 1M: 5.37%
• YTD: 11.82%
• 6M: 8.72%
• 1Y: 21.84%
• 3Y*: 15.72%
• 5Y*: 10.65%
• 10Y*: —

GLCC.TO

• 1D: 2.91%
• 1M: -14.08%
• YTD: -5.15%
• 6M: -3.63%
• 1Y: 50.21%
• 3Y*: 40.00%
• 5Y*: 20.22%
• 10Y*: 13.89%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ZWG.TO BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF	11.82%	7.32%	21.47%	9.25%	-4.38%	17.19%	2.32%
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	-5.15%	137.43%	20.18%	6.19%	-1.80%	-9.38%	18.11%

Correlation

The correlation between ZWG.TO and GLCC.TO is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.15
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2020	0.12

The correlation between ZWG.TO and GLCC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (all time) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ZWG.TO	GLCC.TO
Technology	25.3%	-
Financial Services	20.9%	-
Healthcare	11.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	9.1%	-
Energy	8.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	-
Communication Services	6.2%	-
Industrials	5.2%	-
Basic Materials	4.5%	100.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.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: 70
ZWG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
ZWG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
ZWG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 67
ZWG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
ZWG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 74

GLCC.TO

GLCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 35
GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
GLCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
GLCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 37
GLCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
GLCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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. GLCC.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 Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ZWG.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.96	1.17	+0.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	1.59	+1.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.23	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	1.53	+1.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.20	4.34	+7.87

ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZWG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is higher than the GLCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZWG.TO and GLCC.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.

Drawdowns

ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZWG.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.55%, smaller than the maximum GLCC.TO drawdown of -81.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZWG.TO and GLCC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZWG.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.55%	-81.37%	+55.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.88%	-33.03%	+26.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.87%	-33.03%	+18.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.62%	-37.60%	+21.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.27%	-27.04%	+26.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.45%	-53.15%	+49.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.80%	11.60%	-9.80%

Volatility

ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWG.TO) is 4.96%, while Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (GLCC.TO) has a volatility of 16.63%. This indicates that ZWG.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZWG.TO	GLCC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.96%	16.63%	-11.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.13%	35.94%	-26.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.24%	43.26%	-32.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.76%	32.35%	-20.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.03%	32.16%	-18.13%

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

ZWG.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than GLCC.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZWG.TO vs. GLCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZWG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.87%, less than GLCC.TO's 9.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLCC.TO Global X Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	9.12%	6.01%	10.30%	11.16%	10.08%	6.31%	6.47%	4.58%	5.62%	7.08%	8.75%	2.32%
ZWG.TO BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF	5.87%	6.42%	6.48%	7.42%	7.23%	6.40%	6.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

ZWG.TO and GLCC.TO have a correlation of 0.24, 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 GLCC.TO?

On fees, ZWG.TO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

ZWG.TO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for GLCC.TO.

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

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ZWG.TO and 0.79% for GLCC.TO.