ZWG.TO vs. NXF.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ZWG.TO (BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF) and NXF.TO (CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - ZWG.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by BMO, while NXF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by CI. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ZWG.TO returned 10.76%/yr vs 17.39%/yr for NXF.TO. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ZWG.TO vs. NXF.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 CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.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 11.46% return, which is significantly lower than NXF.TO's 32.43% return.

ZWG.TO

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 7.53%
• YTD: 11.46%
• 6M: 8.19%
• 1Y: 22.65%
• 3Y*: 16.14%
• 5Y*: 10.76%
• 10Y*: —

NXF.TO

• 1D: 1.17%
• 1M: -2.11%
• YTD: 32.43%
• 6M: 29.37%
• 1Y: 45.90%
• 3Y*: 15.64%
• 5Y*: 17.39%
• 10Y*: 8.23%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ZWG.TO BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF	11.46%	7.31%	21.47%	9.25%	-4.38%	17.19%	614.61%
NXF.TO CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)	32.43%	9.19%	-4.66%	6.48%	43.93%	40.64%	-34.81%

Correlation

The correlation between ZWG.TO and NXF.TO is 0.02, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.15
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2020	0.26

Over the past year, the correlation between ZWG.TO and NXF.TO has dropped to 0.02 - well below their long-term average of 0.26, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

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

Return for Risk

ZWG.TO vs. NXF.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: 64
ZWG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
ZWG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
ZWG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
ZWG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ZWG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 69

NXF.TO

NXF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 73
NXF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
NXF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
NXF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 64
NXF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
NXF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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. NXF.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 CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.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	NXF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	2.36	-0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.98	3.03	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.38	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.31	4.90	-1.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.68	13.97	-1.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current ZWG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the NXF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZWG.TO and NXF.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZWG.TO	NXF.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.08	2.36	-0.28
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92	0.75	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.32	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.22	-0.01

Drawdowns

ZWG.TO vs. NXF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZWG.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.55%, smaller than the maximum NXF.TO drawdown of -65.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZWG.TO and NXF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZWG.TO	NXF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.55%	-65.25%	+39.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.88%	-9.41%	+2.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.87%	-24.26%	+9.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.62%	-24.26%	+8.64%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-5.01%	+4.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.46%	-16.04%	+12.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	3.30%	-1.51%

Volatility

ZWG.TO vs. NXF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWG.TO) is 4.16%, while CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.TO) has a volatility of 7.55%. This indicates that ZWG.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NXF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ZWG.TO	NXF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.16%	7.55%	-3.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.75%	15.65%	-6.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.95%	19.57%	-8.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.71%	23.39%	-11.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	239.97%	26.16%	+213.81%

Dividends

ZWG.TO vs. NXF.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZWG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.88%, less than NXF.TO's 8.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NXF.TO CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)	8.04%	7.70%	8.50%	8.60%	11.22%	9.48%	11.23%	7.83%	9.38%	6.50%	8.24%	8.05%
ZWG.TO BMO Global High Dividend Covered Call ETF	5.88%	6.41%	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 NXF.TO in my portfolio?

ZWG.TO and NXF.TO have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

ZWG.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while NXF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and CI.