Somewhat depends upon your polar alignment. Polar alignment is more critical the closer you get to one of the poles, so if you have some alignment error you may get more drift and thus a need for more corrections the closer you are to the pole (and those corrections would likely need to be in both R.A. and Dec, meaning double the trouble). Similarly, if you were targeted directly at the pole you really don't need any tracking, but if your mount's polar axis isn't aligned directly to the pole then your (mis)tracking will continually move you away from the target (i.e. the pole).
That said, being closer to the pole means there is actually less movement as the target circles the pole, so random noise (error) in your drive may result in less movement in the target (think of it as kind of a lever, the closer to the axis of the pivot the less the displacement).
However, seeing is probably the greatest determinant in the quality of your guiding and since seeing is normally (always?) better toward the zenith that may be where you get your best guiding. Also, as you move down toward the horizon the effects of atmospheric refraction become worse, meaning that stars will no longer be moving at the sidereal rate (their rate of motion appears to slow down and your guiding has to correct for that change).