Category: DIY Investors

ZGRO versus ZGRO.T: what’s the difference?

RobH2 Comments

ZGRO and ZGRO.T are both asset allocation funds (aka all-in-ones1) offered by BMO. They hold the same assets, and they both generate the same (dividends-reinvested) returns. But ZGRO.T says it has a yield of 5.65% whereas ZGRO has a yield of 1.73%2. How is this possible? Full disclosure: I don’t own either of these funds because I have historically invested in a very similar-to-ZGRO product, XGRO, instead3.

Let’s start with a really high level look at these funds4.

ZGRO vs ZGRO.T, Overview Tab (source bmogam.com)

The first thing I’ll point out is one of caution: ZGRO and ZGRO.T have very similar tickers and it’s all-too-easy to mix them up. The fund names are also very similar, although ZGRO.T adds the words “Fixed Percentage Distribution Units” to the mix. That’s a clue. The other things we can learn from this first glance is that ZGRO.T is pretty new (Inception Date), is about 1/20th the size of ZGRO in terms of investments (Net Assets), has an identical MER to ZGRO, but whoa, that distribution yield is off the charts. Put simply, if you had $1000 in ZGRO, and $1000 in ZGRO.T, and the last distribution paid was assumed to be constant5, you’d get $11.73 from ZGRO and $56.50 from ZGRO.T over the next twelve months. Huh?

This is even more puzzling if one takes a look at what each of the two ETFs hold: it’s identical:

ETF HeldZGRO %6ZGRO.T %
ZSP – S&P 50037.037.0
ZCN – TSX Capped20.420.4
ZAG – CAD Bond13.813.8
ZEA – MSCI EAFE13.413.4
ZEM – MSCI Emerg6.76.7
ZUAG – US Bond5.85.8
ZMID – US Mid Cap2.02.0
ZSML – US Small Cap1.01.0
Cash00

Comparing top holdings, ZGRO versus ZGRO.T. Can you see a difference? I can’t see a difference.

I spent quite a bit of time searching on the BMO website trying to get their take on the difference. In a lot of places, (e.g. the simplified prospectus7), the two funds are treated as the same. After nearly giving up, I did come across this document which has a teeny tiny footnote, which I reproduce here:

These units are Fixed Percentage Distribution Units that provide a fixed monthly distribution based on an annual distribution rate. Distributions may be comprised of net income, net realized capital gains and/or a return of capital. The monthly amount is determined by applying the annual distribution rate to the T Series Fund’s unit price at the end of the previous calendar year, arriving at an annual amount per unit for the coming year. This annual amount is then divided into 12 equal distributions, which are paid each month.

BMO Asset Allocation ETFs Whitepaper

So the big difference as I see is is that ZGRO.T attempts to give a stable yield in 12 month chunks. It does this by

  1. Giving you dividends from the underlying assets (so does ZGRO)
  2. Selling underlying assets (and generating a capital gain)
  3. Giving you back your own money (this is known as as return of capital)

Let’s take a look at the two from a tax perspective (note that this only matters if you were to hold these funds in a non-registered account):

ZGRO vs ZGRO.T 2024 Distribution Tax Tab (source bmogam.com)

And here the distinction between the two becomes clearer: ZGRO.T is making good use of Return of Capital (RoC) to distribute a dividend with limited near-term tax implications. But as always, there’s no free lunch — using RoC means that future capital gains will be higher since RoC reduces the ACB8 of the funds in question, and if your ACB drops to zero, you have to treat RoC as a capital gain.

So when might you consider using ZGRO.T instead of ZGRO?

ZGRO.T makes sense in a RRIF account. It’s essentially automating some of the steps I have to take every month to get paid (you can see the mechanism I use here). Every month, I have to sell some of my holdings in order to get the RRIF-minimum payment out.

In a non-registered account, ZGRO.T’s monthly distributions might be useful if you had the need for consistent monthly cash flow; in addition, if you expect to at some point be in a lower tax bracket, it might help you save future tax, since it’s deferring some gains by using Return of Capital. In my case, I don’t see a good reason to use it since I would have to sell existing assets in order to raise funds to buy it, which generates capital gains.

So, in summary, the two funds are the same from a total return perspective, with ZGRO.T more monthly cash and ZGRO providing more paper gains. In a RRIF account, ZGRO.T automates some of the manual selling needed to execute decumulation. In a non-registered account, the tax treatment of the two is different, and you’d have to work out the numbers to see if it’s a benefit or not.

  1. If you want to read about all-in-ones, https://moneyengineer.ca/2025/01/21/why-you-can-fire-your-advisor-asset-allocation-etfs/ is a good place to start. ↩︎
  2. This yield is calculated by dividing the most recent per share distribution by the share price and multiplying by 12. In essence, this number is the value of the most recent (monthly in the case of ZGRO.T, quarterly in the case of ZGRO) dividend payout extrapolated over the full year. It may or may not represent what kind of yield you get in the future. ↩︎
  3. Why? Inertia. There are minor differences in the makeup of XGRO versus ZGRO but either is a fine choice for the lazy investor. ↩︎
  4. All the tables here are right off BMO’s ETF selector, which is excellent, by the way. ↩︎
  5. ZGRO is currently paying 7.3 cents per share every quarter and this has been stable since 2020. ZGRO.T is currently paying 6 cents per unit held every month and this has been stable since March 2025. ↩︎
  6. As of September 18, 2025 ↩︎
  7. which weighs in at ~450 pages. I’d hate to see the non-simplified prospectus. ↩︎
  8. Adjusted Cost Base. The average per unit price you pay for a share, necessary to track in order to accurately calculate capital gains (or losses). I use adjustedcostbase.ca for this, found in Tools I Use ↩︎

News: Canada and US both lower prime rate

RobH2 Comments

To the surprise of no one, both the Bank of Canada and the US Federal Reserve lowered their headline interest rate by 1/4 of a % (that’s 25 basis points if you want to be fancy about it).

Official statement from BoC sets the policy rate at 2.5%, down from 2.75%.

Official statement from the US Fed lowers the “target range for the federal funds rate by 1/4 of point”, which puts the range between 4.0% and 4.25%1

Anyway, to the DIY investor, this will no doubt lower the rates available by the HISA providers, last captured here. A quick spot check shows no change yet2, but that won’t last, I predict. The rates have now been lowered and I’ve updated the September table accordingly. The next meetings for these orgs happens at the end of October, so this means stability for the next 6 weeks on the interest rate front.

  1. why is it range? I have no idea. ↩︎
  2. insert joke about “banker’s hours” here ↩︎

News: Upcoming changes to S&P 500, S&P/TSX Composite

RobH1 Comment

As a dedicated low-fee ETF investor (new to ETFs? read more here), most of my holdings are actually tied up in various index funds; as of right now about 26% of my retirement savings are tied up in the S&P 5001 (largely by holding AOA and XGRO, two of my ETF all-stars), and another 11% are tied up in the S&P/TSX capped composite2 (a lot of which is due to holding XGRO)3.

Beyond making sure I keep my asset allocations in line (read more about that concept here), there’s not much to do. But this doesn’t mean that what I ultimately hold isn’t always changing!

I was reminded of that fact when I noted the latest announcements from S&P, who on a quarterly basis, rejig their indices to add new stocks and drop others. It’s not something I’ve typically paid any attention to, but I share it with you because I found it interesting.

S&P 500: AppLovin, Robinhood & Emcor added, MarketAxxess, Caesars and Enphase deleted

Effective, September 22, 2025 per the press release.

Newly added: AppLovin seems to deal in the world of online advertising, Robinhood is a notorious4 online broker, and Emcor looks to be a construction company.

Newly booted: Marketaxess sells a platform to financial services companies, Caesars operates casinos, and Enphase is a solar energy product company5.

S&P/TSX Composite6: 5 added, 2 deleted

Effective September 22, 2025 per the press release.

Newly added: Aris, Discovery, Perpetua and Skeena who are all involved with precious metals production7 and Curaleaf which is a weed dispenser.

Newly deleted: Enghouse (software and services, based in Markham) and Pason (products and services for oil and gas based in Calgary).

If ever you want to see what’s in either of these indicies, then check out this chart for the S&P 500 and this chart for the TSX composite.

  1. You can read about this index right from the source if you like. ↩︎
  2. There’s another 6% in the S&P/TSX60 index, which are the 60 largest Canadian firms. The 10 year return of these two indicies is nearly identical — 7.98% for the capped, 8.06% for the TSX 60. You can read about the capped composite here. ↩︎
  3. You may wonder where the rest of holdings are. There’s 15% in various bond indices, 5% in cash, and the rest are in an assortment of international indices (largest are MSCI World ex-US at 10% and MSCI EAFE IMI at around 5%) and lesser-known US/Canadian indicies (like FTSE all-cap Canada or S&P total market US). In the Canada/US case, I’m rather certain that an all-cap index has a very high correlation with the large-cap indices; I could have bundled it all together I suppose. ↩︎
  4. Notorious because they are associated with meme stocks. ↩︎
  5. It’s probably not a good time for any US company in the renewables business, sadly. ↩︎
  6. I wondered when the last change to the TSX 60 was. I couldn’t find one after September 2019! ↩︎
  7. Perhaps a “why I don’t need to buy gold bars from Costco” comment is apropos here ↩︎

How to share an RESP among multiple kids

RobHLeave a comment

In a previous post, I shared my approach for investing in an RESP, and I promised I’d show you how I share the funds therein between my kids.

To me, it didn’t seem fair to split the cash value of the RESP between the kids. My kids (I have two) started higher education at different times, years apart, and so needed the money at different times. The investments in the RESP continue to grow even after decumulation begins, so how to account for that?

The way I track it is in this Google Sheet.

The idea behind it is pretty simple. You create a “mutual fund” on the day the first withdrawal happens with a fixed number of units. (I used 1 unit = $1, but you could set your unit value to whatever you like). Then, each child (if you want to be fair) gets the SAME number of units on that day. Children sell their units as they request money from the RESP. The unit price fluctuates depending on the value of the RESP overall.

So say you have a $10000 RESP divided among 4 kids. On launch day, you create the fund and create 10000 units, each priced at $1. You give each of your 4 kids 2500 units on that day. On that day, that means they also each have $2500.

Kid #1 needs $5000 for tuition, and this means they spend 5000 units. That’s row 17 in the example sheet.

Time passes, and Kid 1 needs more money. The wisely-invested RESP continues to grow, and has nearly made back all the money that was removed from it, valued on December 1 at $99,800, which is entered in column B. The unit price has increased as a result, from $1 to $1.05 (that’s an automatic calculation).

So Kid 1 has 20,000 units, each worth $1.05. The other kids still have all 25000 units, but they are now worth more money, $1.05*25000 =$26,250.00. Kid 1’s $3000 request costs 2885 units thanks to the growth, and Kid 1’s unit balance is updated accordingly.

This continues on, and all you need to do is fill down more rows as you need them, entering the values in the yellow cells yourself. You can even withdraw for multiple kids on the same date.

I’ve been running our family RESP fund since August 2018; unit price was $1. I just completed a transaction for kid #2, and the unit value was $1.46. The last two years have been exceptionally kind to this fund.

If you have questions or comments on this method, hit me up at comments@moneyengineer.ca!