CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Global X Copper Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (CPCC.TO) and Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF (HLIT.TO).

CPCC.TO and HLIT.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CPCC.TO is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the Solactive North American Listed Copper Producers Index. It was launched on Dec 1, 2025. HLIT.TO is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the Solactive Global Lithium Producers Index. It was launched on Jun 22, 2021. Both CPCC.TO and HLIT.TO are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Copper Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (CPCC.TO) and Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF (HLIT.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CPCC.TO Global X Copper Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	0.71%	9.59%
HLIT.TO Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF	9.48%	7.77%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CPCC.TO achieves a 0.71% return, which is significantly lower than HLIT.TO's 9.48% return.

CPCC.TO

• 1D: 6.72%
• 1M: -17.90%
• YTD: 0.71%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HLIT.TO

• 1D: 1.25%
• 1M: -3.86%
• YTD: 9.48%
• 6M: 44.95%
• 1Y: 77.65%
• 3Y*: -12.21%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPCC.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than HLIT.TO's 0.89% expense ratio.

HLIT.TO

Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF

CPCC.TO

Global X Copper Producer Equity Covered Call ETF

Return for Risk

CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HLIT.TO

HLIT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 84
HLIT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
HLIT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HLIT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 77
HLIT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
HLIT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Copper Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (CPCC.TO) and Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF (HLIT.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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CPCC.TO	HLIT.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.91	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.84	0.00	+0.83

Correlation

The correlation between CPCC.TO and HLIT.TO is 0.65, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Dividend Comparison

CPCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, more than HLIT.TO's 0.11% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CPCC.TO Global X Copper Producer Equity Covered Call ETF	1.94%	0.65%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HLIT.TO Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF	0.11%	0.12%	2.24%	2.58%	1.88%

Drawdowns

CPCC.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.12%, smaller than the maximum HLIT.TO drawdown of -77.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPCC.TO and HLIT.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CPCC.TO	HLIT.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.12%	-77.20%	+50.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-23.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.06%	-46.55%	+28.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.88%	-37.68%	+31.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	8.35%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CPCC.TO	HLIT.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	13.79%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	29.37%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.22%	40.95%	+2.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.22%	38.78%	+4.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.22%	38.78%	+4.44%