CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

CBNK.TO (Mulvihill Canadian Bank Enhanced Yield ETF) and HPF.TO (Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units) are both exchange-traded funds - CBNK.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Mulvihill, while HPF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Harvest. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CBNK.TO returned 41.85%/yr vs 14.96%/yr for HPF.TO. Their 0.22 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CBNK.TO charges 1.68%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for HPF.TO.

Performance

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Mulvihill Canadian Bank Enhanced Yield ETF (CBNK.TO) and Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBNK.TO achieves a 44.23% return, which is significantly higher than HPF.TO's 37.52% return.

CBNK.TO

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -1.20%
• 6M: 43.64%
• YTD: 44.23%
• 1Y: 92.97%
• 3Y*: 41.85%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 22.19%

HPF.TO

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 14.19%
• 6M: 28.39%
• YTD: 37.52%
• 1Y: 48.15%
• 3Y*: 14.96%
• 5Y*: 18.04%
• 10Y*: 6.10%
• ALL TIME*: 1.82%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CBNK.TO Mulvihill Canadian Bank Enhanced Yield ETF	CA$228.74K	CA$269.05K	CA$220.65K
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	CA$32.33K	CA$32.46K	CA$59.23K

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CBNK.TO Mulvihill Canadian Bank Enhanced Yield ETF	44.23%	51.67%	27.42%	8.42%	-19.87%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	37.52%	8.98%	-2.46%	2.51%	18.39%

Correlation

The correlation between CBNK.TO and HPF.TO is -0.13, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.13
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 2022	0.22

The correlation between CBNK.TO and HPF.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to 0.22 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CBNK.TO

CBNK.TO Risk / Return Rank: 98
CBNK.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
CBNK.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
CBNK.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
CBNK.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
CBNK.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 98

HPF.TO

HPF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 87
HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
HPF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HPF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 86
HPF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
HPF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 83

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mulvihill Canadian Bank Enhanced Yield ETF (CBNK.TO) and Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.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.

	CBNK.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.28	2.33	+2.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.40	2.97	+3.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.85	1.38	+0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.21	3.86	+5.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	37.69	11.43	+26.25

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBNK.TO Sharpe Ratio is 5.28, which is higher than the HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBNK.TO and HPF.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

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBNK.TO drawdown since its inception was -32.12%, smaller than the maximum HPF.TO drawdown of -72.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBNK.TO and HPF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBNK.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.12%	-72.97%	+40.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.03%	-12.01%	+1.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.55%	-22.85%	+6.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-23.87%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-69.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.80%	0.00%	-3.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.56%	-26.18%	+15.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.45%	4.05%	-1.60%

Volatility

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Volatility Comparison

Mulvihill Canadian Bank Enhanced Yield ETF (CBNK.TO) has a higher volatility of 8.18% compared to Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO) at 6.16%. This indicates that CBNK.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HPF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBNK.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.18%	6.16%	+2.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.20%	16.32%	-1.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.52%	19.91%	-2.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.77%	23.54%	-5.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.77%	28.03%	-10.26%

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBNK.TO has a 1.68% expense ratio, which is higher than HPF.TO's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBNK.TO vs. HPF.TO - Dividend Comparison

CBNK.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.82%, less than HPF.TO's 7.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CBNK.TO Mulvihill Canadian Bank Enhanced Yield ETF	5.82%	5.86%	8.25%	9.59%	7.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	7.58%	9.93%	9.80%	8.75%	6.58%	4.61%	15.32%	8.74%	8.78%	12.87%	13.58%	13.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBNK.TO and HPF.TO in my portfolio?

CBNK.TO and HPF.TO have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CBNK.TO or HPF.TO?

On fees, HPF.TO is cheaper at 0.99% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBNK.TO or HPF.TO?

HPF.TO is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.68% for CBNK.TO.

What is the main difference between CBNK.TO and HPF.TO?

CBNK.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HPF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Mulvihill and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 1.68% for CBNK.TO and 0.99% for HPF.TO.