CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

CNCC.TO (Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF) and HLIF.TO (Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CNCC.TO returned 15.72%/yr vs 20.94%/yr for HLIF.TO. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNCC.TO charges 0.62%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for HLIF.TO.

Performance

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF (CNCC.TO) and Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNCC.TO achieves a 11.10% return, which is significantly lower than HLIF.TO's 20.71% return.

CNCC.TO

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 1.96%
• 6M: 9.11%
• YTD: 11.10%
• 1Y: 23.65%
• 3Y*: 15.72%
• 5Y*: 9.88%
• 10Y*: 6.42%
• ALL TIME*: 2.89%

HLIF.TO

• 1D: 0.86%
• 1M: 3.52%
• 6M: 17.85%
• YTD: 20.71%
• 1Y: 37.14%
• 3Y*: 20.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.79%

*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)
CNCC.TO Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF	CA$100.99K	CA$88.04K	CA$159.00K
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A	CA$95.81K	CA$121.96K	CA$179.07K

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CNCC.TO Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF	11.10%	19.50%	14.81%	7.07%	-7.21%
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A	20.71%	25.43%	17.21%	6.13%	-2.97%

Correlation

The correlation between CNCC.TO and HLIF.TO is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2022	0.69

The correlation between CNCC.TO and HLIF.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNCC.TO	HLIF.TO
Financial Services	40.3%	40.6%
Energy	17.7%	23.0%
Basic Materials	13.6%	6.6%
Technology	8.7%	-
Industrials	7.7%	3.6%
Consumer Cyclical	3.9%	6.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	-
Utilities	2.6%	13.4%
Communication Services	2.0%	6.2%
Real Estate	0.2%	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNCC.TO

CNCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 93
CNCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CNCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CNCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CNCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CNCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 94

HLIF.TO

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

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.

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF (CNCC.TO) and Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.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.

	CNCC.TO	HLIF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	5.13	-2.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.43	7.60	-4.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	2.03	-0.55
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	12.07	-8.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.93	59.07	-40.14

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is lower than the HLIF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 5.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNCC.TO and HLIF.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

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -46.00%, which is greater than HLIF.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNCC.TO and HLIF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNCC.TO	HLIF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.00%	-11.12%	-34.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.19%	-3.09%	-3.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.11%	-9.96%	-1.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.61%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-0.23%	+0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.28%	-1.96%	-12.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	0.63%	+0.62%

Volatility

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF (CNCC.TO) is 1.89%, while Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.TO) has a volatility of 2.45%. This indicates that CNCC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HLIF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNCC.TO	HLIF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.89%	2.45%	-0.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.89%	6.03%	+1.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.44%	7.28%	+2.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.43%	10.39%	+2.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.75%	10.39%	+4.36%

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNCC.TO has a 0.62% expense ratio, which is lower than HLIF.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNCC.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Dividend Comparison

CNCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.75%, more than HLIF.TO's 5.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNCC.TO Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF	6.75%	7.57%	9.68%	10.07%	5.76%	2.64%	2.77%	2.67%	3.02%	2.76%	2.62%	4.28%
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A	5.93%	6.26%	7.33%	7.96%	3.91%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNCC.TO and HLIF.TO in my portfolio?

CNCC.TO and HLIF.TO have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CNCC.TO or HLIF.TO?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, CNCC.TO or HLIF.TO?

CNCC.TO is cheaper with a 0.62% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for HLIF.TO.

What is the main difference between CNCC.TO and HLIF.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.62% for CNCC.TO and 0.79% for HLIF.TO.