EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO
EACC.NEO (Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF) and CNQE.TO (Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. EACC.NEO is passively managed, while CNQE.TO is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. EACC.NEO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CNQE.TO.
Performance
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EACC.NEO achieves a 8.26% return, which is significantly lower than CNQE.TO's 38.88% return.
EACC.NEO
- 1D
- 0.66%
- 1M
- 4.81%
- YTD
- 8.26%
- 6M
- 8.64%
- 1Y
- 20.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CNQE.TO
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 1.72%
- YTD
- 38.88%
- 6M
- 34.99%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EACC.NEO Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF | 8.26% | 4.80% |
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF | 38.88% | 13.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between EACC.NEO and CNQE.TO is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2025 | -0.11 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO — Risk / Return Rank
EACC.NEO
CNQE.TO
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF (EACC.NEO) and Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF (CNQE.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.
| EACC.NEO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.79 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.14 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EACC.NEO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.35 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.91 | 2.45 | -1.54 |
Drawdowns
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EACC.NEO drawdown since its inception was -13.35%, smaller than the maximum CNQE.TO drawdown of -18.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EACC.NEO and CNQE.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EACC.NEO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.35% | -18.22% | +4.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.30% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.08% | -6.40% | +6.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.09% | -4.14% | +2.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.28% | — | — |
Volatility
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EACC.NEO | CNQE.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.26% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.79% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.97% | 33.04% | -18.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.05% | 33.04% | -17.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.05% | 33.04% | -17.99% |
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
EACC.NEO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than CNQE.TO's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
EACC.NEO vs. CNQE.TO - Dividend Comparison
EACC.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.43%, less than CNQE.TO's 9.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CNQE.TO Harvest CNQ Enhanced High Income Shares ETF | 9.43% | 4.42% | 0.00% |
EACC.NEO Global X MSCI EAFE Covered Call ETF | 7.43% | 7.55% | 5.12% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EACC.NEO and CNQE.TO have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNQE.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNQE.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EACC.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EACC.NEO and 0.40% for CNQE.TO.
Find the right allocation for EACC.NEO and CNQE.TO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer