EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO
EBIT.TO (Evolve Bitcoin ETF CAD) and XRPP.TO (Purpose XRP ETF CAD Currency Hedged Units) are both Cryptocurrency funds. EBIT.TO is passively managed, while XRPP.TO is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EBIT.TO charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for XRPP.TO.
Performance
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EBIT.TO achieves a -24.84% return, which is significantly higher than XRPP.TO's -34.43% return.
EBIT.TO
- 1D
- -2.10%
- 1M
- -17.64%
- YTD
- -24.84%
- 6M
- -30.52%
- 1Y
- -38.71%
- 3Y*
- 33.13%
- 5Y*
- 13.09%
- 10Y*
- —
XRPP.TO
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- -12.92%
- YTD
- -34.43%
- 6M
- -45.39%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EBIT.TO Evolve Bitcoin ETF CAD | -24.84% | -16.31% |
XRPP.TO Purpose XRP ETF CAD Currency Hedged Units | -34.43% | -15.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between EBIT.TO and XRPP.TO is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 19, 2025 | 0.82 |
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
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO — Risk / Return Rank
EBIT.TO
XRPP.TO
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Evolve Bitcoin ETF CAD (EBIT.TO) and Purpose XRP ETF CAD Currency Hedged Units (XRPP.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.
| EBIT.TO | XRPP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.86 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.77 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.33 | — | — |
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
| EBIT.TO | XRPP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.91 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.05 | -0.62 | +0.68 |
Drawdowns
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EBIT.TO drawdown since its inception was -75.45%, which is greater than XRPP.TO's maximum drawdown of -66.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBIT.TO and XRPP.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EBIT.TO | XRPP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -75.45% | -66.98% | -8.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -50.63% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -50.63% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -75.45% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -48.66% | -66.67% | +18.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -33.06% | -38.53% | +5.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 29.25% | — | — |
Volatility
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EBIT.TO | XRPP.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.66% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 34.02% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 42.89% | 74.60% | -31.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 53.64% | 74.60% | -20.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.80% | 74.60% | -19.80% |
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
EBIT.TO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than XRPP.TO's 1.00% expense ratio.
Dividends
EBIT.TO vs. XRPP.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither EBIT.TO nor XRPP.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
EBIT.TO and XRPP.TO have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EBIT.TO is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EBIT.TO is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for XRPP.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Evolve and Purpose Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EBIT.TO and 1.00% for XRPP.TO.
Find the right allocation for EBIT.TO and XRPP.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