CNCC.TO vs. HPF.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

CNCC.TO (Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF) and HPF.TO (Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF Class A CAD Hedged) are both exchange-traded funds - CNCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X, while HPF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Harvest. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CNCC.TO returned 6.42%/yr vs 5.99%/yr for HPF.TO. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CNCC.TO vs. HPF.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 Energy Leaders Income ETF Class A CAD Hedged (HPF.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 HPF.TO's 37.34% return. Over the past 10 years, CNCC.TO has outperformed HPF.TO with an annualized return of 6.42%, while HPF.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 5.99% annualized 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%

HPF.TO

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 13.55%
• 6M: 29.62%
• YTD: 37.34%
• 1Y: 46.20%
• 3Y*: 14.97%
• 5Y*: 18.29%
• 10Y*: 5.99%
• ALL TIME*: 1.81%

*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
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF Class A CAD Hedged	CA$27.59K	CA$36.34K	CA$60.14K

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CNCC.TO Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF	11.10%	19.50%	14.81%	7.07%	-7.67%	26.82%	-8.02%	7.03%	-8.79%	3.60%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF Class A CAD Hedged	37.34%	8.98%	-2.46%	2.51%	38.58%	33.23%	-37.56%	9.43%	-18.69%	-0.07%

Correlation

The correlation between CNCC.TO and HPF.TO is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.29
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2014	0.39

Over the past year, the correlation between CNCC.TO and HPF.TO has dropped to 0.03 - well below their long-term average of 0.39, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

Sectors	CNCC.TO	HPF.TO
Financial Services	40.3%	-
Energy	17.7%	100.0%
Basic Materials	13.6%	-
Technology	8.7%	-
Industrials	7.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.9%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	-
Utilities	2.6%	-
Communication Services	2.0%	-
Real Estate	0.2%	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

CNCC.TO vs. HPF.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

HPF.TO

HPF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 88
HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
HPF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
HPF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 87
HPF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
HPF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. HPF.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 Energy Leaders Income ETF Class A CAD Hedged (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.

	CNCC.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.35	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.43	2.99	+0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.38	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	3.86	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.93	11.37	+7.56

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

The current CNCC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNCC.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

CNCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -46.00%, smaller than the maximum HPF.TO drawdown of -72.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNCC.TO and HPF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNCC.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.00%	-72.97%	+26.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.19%	-12.01%	+5.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.11%	-22.85%	+11.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.92%	-23.87%	+5.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.61%	-69.11%	+29.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	0.00%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.28%	-26.22%	+11.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	4.08%	-2.83%

Volatility

CNCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Canadian S&P/TSX 60 Covered Call ETF (CNCC.TO) is 1.89%, while Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF Class A CAD Hedged (HPF.TO) has a volatility of 5.41%. This indicates that CNCC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HPF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNCC.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.89%	5.41%	-3.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.89%	16.10%	-8.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.44%	19.76%	-10.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.43%	23.53%	-11.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.75%	28.02%	-13.27%

Dividends

CNCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Dividend Comparison

CNCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.75%, less than HPF.TO's 7.54% 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%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF Class A CAD Hedged	7.54%	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 CNCC.TO and HPF.TO in my portfolio?

CNCC.TO and HPF.TO have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

CNCC.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HPF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Harvest.