CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

CWIN.TO (HAMILTON CHAMPIONS Enhanced Canadian Dividend ETF Class E Units) and PDF.TO (Purpose Core Dividend Fund) are both Dividend funds. CWIN.TO is passively managed, while PDF.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, CWIN.TO returned 40.70% vs 35.64% for PDF.TO. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CWIN.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for PDF.TO.

Performance

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in HAMILTON CHAMPIONS Enhanced Canadian Dividend ETF Class E Units (CWIN.TO) and Purpose Core Dividend Fund (PDF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWIN.TO achieves a 21.87% return, which is significantly higher than PDF.TO's 20.56% return.

CWIN.TO

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 1.25%
• 6M: 19.54%
• YTD: 21.87%
• 1Y: 40.70%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 31.82%

PDF.TO

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 1.78%
• 6M: 17.65%
• YTD: 20.56%
• 1Y: 35.64%
• 3Y*: 19.06%
• 5Y*: 12.16%
• 10Y*: 9.70%
• ALL TIME*: 10.47%

*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)
CWIN.TO HAMILTON CHAMPIONS Enhanced Canadian Dividend ETF Class E Units	CA$14.83K	CA$14.75K	CA$24.96K
PDF.TO Purpose Core Dividend Fund	CA$197.57K	CA$214.74K	CA$225.86K

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CWIN.TO HAMILTON CHAMPIONS Enhanced Canadian Dividend ETF Class E Units	21.87%	24.29%
PDF.TO Purpose Core Dividend Fund	20.56%	16.72%

Correlation

The correlation between CWIN.TO and PDF.TO is 0.60, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2025	0.62

The correlation between CWIN.TO and PDF.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWIN.TO

CWIN.TO Risk / Return Rank: 95
CWIN.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CWIN.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
CWIN.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CWIN.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
CWIN.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

PDF.TO

PDF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 97
PDF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
PDF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PDF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PDF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
PDF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HAMILTON CHAMPIONS Enhanced Canadian Dividend ETF Class E Units (CWIN.TO) and Purpose Core Dividend Fund (PDF.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.

	CWIN.TO	PDF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.10	4.17	-1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.12	6.01	-1.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.78	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.42	5.54	-0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.02	25.22	-5.21

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWIN.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.10, which is comparable to the PDF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 4.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWIN.TO and PDF.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

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWIN.TO drawdown since its inception was -10.87%, smaller than the maximum PDF.TO drawdown of -36.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWIN.TO and PDF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWIN.TO	PDF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.87%	-36.00%	+25.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.15%	-6.35%	-0.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.28%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-15.81%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.14%	-0.76%	-1.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.32%	-3.44%	+2.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.93%	1.39%	+0.54%

Volatility

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for HAMILTON CHAMPIONS Enhanced Canadian Dividend ETF Class E Units (CWIN.TO) is 2.60%, while Purpose Core Dividend Fund (PDF.TO) has a volatility of 2.82%. This indicates that CWIN.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PDF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWIN.TO	PDF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.60%	2.82%	-0.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.31%	6.95%	+2.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.53%	8.46%	+4.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.63%	10.35%	+3.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.63%	13.58%	+0.05%

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWIN.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than PDF.TO's 0.66% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWIN.TO vs. PDF.TO - Dividend Comparison

CWIN.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%, more than PDF.TO's 2.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CWIN.TO HAMILTON CHAMPIONS Enhanced Canadian Dividend ETF Class E Units	3.13%	3.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PDF.TO Purpose Core Dividend Fund	2.78%	3.49%	3.82%	4.17%	3.77%	3.19%	3.84%	3.65%	4.33%	3.50%	3.38%	3.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CWIN.TO and PDF.TO in my portfolio?

CWIN.TO and PDF.TO have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CWIN.TO or PDF.TO?

On fees, CWIN.TO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CWIN.TO or PDF.TO?

CWIN.TO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for PDF.TO.

What is the main difference between CWIN.TO and PDF.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Hamilton and Purpose. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CWIN.TO and 0.66% for PDF.TO.