CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO
CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) and HBF.TO (Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - CLU.NEO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI US 1000 Canadian Dollar Hedged Index, while HBF.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Harvest Portfolios Group. CLU.NEO is passively managed, while HBF.TO is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CLU.NEO returned 11.02%/yr vs 11.26%/yr for HBF.TO. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CLU.NEO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for HBF.TO.
Performance
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CLU.NEO having a 8.69% return and HBF.TO slightly higher at 8.92%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CLU.NEO having a 11.02% annualized return and HBF.TO not far ahead at 11.26%.
CLU.NEO
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.57%
- YTD
- 8.69%
- 6M
- 10.48%
- 1Y
- 24.65%
- 3Y*
- 16.95%
- 5Y*
- 9.30%
- 10Y*
- 11.02%
HBF.TO
- 1D
- 0.71%
- 1M
- 3.38%
- YTD
- 8.92%
- 6M
- 8.16%
- 1Y
- 25.84%
- 3Y*
- 14.74%
- 5Y*
- 7.82%
- 10Y*
- 11.26%
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 8.69% | 15.20% | 14.82% | 13.13% | -9.37% | 31.13% | 3.57% | 25.41% | -11.16% | 14.83% |
HBF.TO Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged) | 8.92% | 15.51% | 13.12% | 11.23% | -14.97% | 21.88% | 11.41% | 25.99% | -4.71% | 18.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLU.NEO and HBF.TO is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2014 | 0.58 |
The correlation between CLU.NEO and HBF.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (1 year) to 0.67 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
CLU.NEO
HBF.TO
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) and Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged) (HBF.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.
| CLU.NEO | HBF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.45 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.86 | 3.33 | +0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.84 | 13.69 | +1.15 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CLU.NEO | HBF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.50 | 2.52 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 | 0.56 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | 0.67 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.61 | 0.50 | +0.12 |
Drawdowns
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLU.NEO drawdown since its inception was -39.93%, which is greater than HBF.TO's maximum drawdown of -35.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLU.NEO and HBF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLU.NEO | HBF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.93% | -35.28% | -4.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.55% | -7.79% | +1.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.57% | -15.21% | -1.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.66% | -23.69% | +3.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.93% | -35.28% | -4.65% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.70% | -0.44% | -0.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.74% | -6.76% | +2.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.70% | 1.89% | -0.19% |
Volatility
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) is 2.30%, while Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged) (HBF.TO) has a volatility of 2.62%. This indicates that CLU.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HBF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLU.NEO | HBF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.30% | 2.62% | -0.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.24% | 7.81% | -0.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.11% | 10.31% | -0.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.54% | 14.07% | +0.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.08% | 16.95% | +1.13% |
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLU.NEO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is lower than HBF.TO's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLU.NEO vs. HBF.TO - Dividend Comparison
CLU.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, less than HBF.TO's 7.36% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLU.NEO iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class | 1.20% | 1.31% | 1.32% | 1.35% | 1.63% | 1.19% | 1.66% | 1.46% | 1.77% | 1.46% | 1.63% | 1.87% |
HBF.TO Harvest US Equity Leaders Income ETF Class A (CAD Hedged) | 7.36% | 7.27% | 7.48% | 7.52% | 7.75% | 5.62% | 6.34% | 6.57% | 7.72% | 6.86% | 7.54% | 7.74% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLU.NEO and HBF.TO have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CLU.NEO is cheaper at 0.72% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CLU.NEO is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for HBF.TO.
CLU.NEO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while HBF.TO is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Harvest Portfolios Group. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CLU.NEO and 0.75% for HBF.TO.
Find the right allocation for CLU.NEO and HBF.TO
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