PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO Covered Call Utilities ETF (ZWU.TO) and ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ZWU.TO is traded in CAD, while 3199.HK is traded in HKD. To make them comparable, the 3199.HK values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZWU.TO achieves a 11.54% return, which is significantly higher than 3199.HK's 7.89% return. Over the past 10 years, ZWU.TO has outperformed 3199.HK with an annualized return of 5.74%, while 3199.HK has yielded a comparatively lower 3.70% annualized return.


ZWU.TO

1D
-0.25%
1M
0.33%
6M
10.74%
YTD
11.54%
1Y
15.14%
3Y*
11.18%
5Y*
6.29%
10Y*
5.74%
ALL TIME*
5.49%

3199.HK

1D
-0.17%
1M
-0.56%
6M
5.77%
YTD
7.89%
1Y
9.74%
3Y*
7.76%
5Y*
5.00%
10Y*
3.70%
ALL TIME*
4.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ZWU.TO
BMO Covered Call Utilities ETF
11.54%13.18%10.97%-2.79%-3.88%15.80%-7.09%23.48%-5.73%5.63%
3199.HK
ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF
7.89%0.51%12.54%-0.12%-0.38%6.59%8.59%-3.12%8.79%-1.74%

Correlation

The correlation between ZWU.TO and 3199.HK is 0.04, 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

0.04

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.05

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.03

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2014

0.02

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

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZWU.TO
ZWU.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
ZWU.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZWU.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZWU.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
ZWU.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZWU.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

3199.HK
3199.HK Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
3199.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3199.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
3199.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
3199.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
3199.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO Covered Call Utilities ETF (ZWU.TO) and ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK). 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.


ZWU.TO3199.HKDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.33

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.13

3.86

-0.73

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.34

12.31

-3.98

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZWU.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the 3199.HK Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZWU.TO and 3199.HK, 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...

Drawdowns

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZWU.TO drawdown since its inception was -37.41%, which is greater than 3199.HK's maximum drawdown of -16.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZWU.TO and 3199.HK.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZWU.TO3199.HKDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.41%

-16.35%

-21.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.86%

-2.81%

-2.05%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.23%

-5.76%

-6.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.36%

-8.20%

-15.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.41%

-15.86%

-21.55%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.41%

-1.32%

-0.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.34%

-4.97%

-0.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.82%

0.87%

+0.95%

Volatility

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Volatility Comparison

BMO Covered Call Utilities ETF (ZWU.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.38% compared to ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) at 1.73%. This indicates that ZWU.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than 3199.HK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZWU.TO3199.HKDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.38%

1.73%

+1.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.74%

4.61%

+2.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.18%

6.05%

+2.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.56%

6.99%

+3.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.20%

8.23%

+5.97%

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZWU.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than 3199.HK's 0.62% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZWU.TO vs. 3199.HK - Dividend Comparison

ZWU.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.05%, more than 3199.HK's 2.50% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
3199.HK
ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF
2.50%3.34%3.42%3.51%3.65%3.40%3.29%3.57%3.61%3.39%3.55%3.68%
ZWU.TO
BMO Covered Call Utilities ETF
7.05%7.59%7.96%8.54%8.35%7.43%7.94%6.29%6.84%6.46%6.77%7.57%

Frequently Asked Questions


ZWU.TO and 3199.HK have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, 3199.HK is cheaper at 0.62% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

3199.HK is cheaper with a 0.62% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ZWU.TO.

ZWU.TO is categorized as Utilities Equities, while 3199.HK is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: BMO and CSOP. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ZWU.TO and 0.62% for 3199.HK.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ZWU.TO and 3199.HK

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