DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO

Last updated Jul 31, 2026

DGLM.TO (Desjardins Global Macro ETF) and PFMS.TO (Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF) are both Multistrategy funds. Both are actively managed. Their -0.01 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. DGLM.TO charges 0.90%/yr vs 4.83%/yr for PFMS.TO.

Performance

DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Desjardins Global Macro ETF (DGLM.TO) and Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF (PFMS.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGLM.TO achieves a 7.84% return, which is significantly higher than PFMS.TO's 7.23% return.

DGLM.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.14%
• 6M: 6.78%
• YTD: 7.84%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

PFMS.TO

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: 1.70%
• 6M: 1.38%
• YTD: 7.23%
• 1Y: 15.42%
• 3Y*: 13.02%
• 5Y*: 6.20%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.07%

*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)
DGLM.TO Desjardins Global Macro ETF	CA$213.70	CA$1.12K	CA$422.16
PFMS.TO Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF	CA$50.23K	CA$36.01K	CA$33.68K

DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DGLM.TO Desjardins Global Macro ETF	7.84%	-0.25%
PFMS.TO Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF	7.23%	2.94%

Correlation

The correlation between DGLM.TO and PFMS.TO is -0.01, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2025	-0.01

Return for Risk

DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

DGLM.TO

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

PFMS.TO

PFMS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 80
PFMS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
PFMS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
PFMS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 80
PFMS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
PFMS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Desjardins Global Macro ETF (DGLM.TO) and Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF (PFMS.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.

	DGLM.TO	PFMS.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.67	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.64	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.33	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.05	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	10.48	—

Drawdowns

DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGLM.TO drawdown since its inception was -2.58%, smaller than the maximum PFMS.TO drawdown of -23.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGLM.TO and PFMS.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	DGLM.TO	PFMS.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.58%	-23.00%	+20.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-5.07%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-5.36%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-13.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.34%	+1.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.47%	-3.79%	+3.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.48%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	DGLM.TO	PFMS.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.56%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	6.20%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.11%	9.30%	-4.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.11%	11.68%	-6.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.11%	13.69%	-8.58%

DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

DGLM.TO has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than PFMS.TO's 4.83% expense ratio.

Dividends

DGLM.TO vs. PFMS.TO - Dividend Comparison

DGLM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, while PFMS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM
DGLM.TO Desjardins Global Macro ETF	1.57%
PFMS.TO Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DGLM.TO and PFMS.TO in my portfolio?

DGLM.TO and PFMS.TO have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, DGLM.TO or PFMS.TO?

On fees, DGLM.TO is cheaper at 0.90% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, DGLM.TO or PFMS.TO?

DGLM.TO is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 4.83% for PFMS.TO.

What is the main difference between DGLM.TO and PFMS.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Desjardins and Picton. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for DGLM.TO and 4.83% for PFMS.TO.