ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

ESGG.TO (BMO MSCI Global Selection Equity Index ETF) and PFLS.TO (PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ESGG.TO is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Selection Index, while PFLS.TO is a Long-Short fund actively managed by PICTON Investments. ESGG.TO is passively managed, while PFLS.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ESGG.TO returned 13.06%/yr vs 10.28%/yr for PFLS.TO. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ESGG.TO charges 0.28%/yr vs 6.48%/yr for PFLS.TO.

Performance

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO MSCI Global Selection Equity Index ETF (ESGG.TO) and PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESGG.TO achieves a 10.35% return, which is significantly higher than PFLS.TO's 8.20% return.

ESGG.TO

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: -0.68%
• 6M: 8.05%
• YTD: 10.35%
• 1Y: 20.50%
• 3Y*: 19.67%
• 5Y*: 13.06%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.70%

PFLS.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.40%
• 6M: 6.14%
• YTD: 8.20%
• 1Y: 16.31%
• 3Y*: 14.01%
• 5Y*: 10.28%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.84%

*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)
ESGG.TO BMO MSCI Global Selection Equity Index ETF	CA$15.03K	CA$35.47K	CA$41.90K
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund	CA$110.34K	CA$123.83K	CA$187.96K

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ESGG.TO BMO MSCI Global Selection Equity Index ETF	10.35%	15.44%	27.08%	23.34%	-14.25%	23.71%	8.84%
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund	8.20%	13.69%	19.22%	6.68%	0.48%	18.51%	16.26%

Correlation

The correlation between ESGG.TO and PFLS.TO is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.40
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2020	0.35

Return for Risk

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESGG.TO

ESGG.TO Risk / Return Rank: 72
ESGG.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
ESGG.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
ESGG.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 74
ESGG.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
ESGG.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 70

PFLS.TO

PFLS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 75
PFLS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
PFLS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
PFLS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 78
PFLS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
PFLS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO MSCI Global Selection Equity Index ETF (ESGG.TO) and PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.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.

	ESGG.TO	PFLS.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.73	1.78	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.51	2.52	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.33	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.22	2.35	-0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.66	9.80	-1.14

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESGG.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is comparable to the PFLS.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESGG.TO and PFLS.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

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESGG.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.90%, which is greater than PFLS.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESGG.TO and PFLS.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESGG.TO	PFLS.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.90%	-11.82%	-16.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.27%	-6.98%	-2.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.79%	-9.40%	-8.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.31%	-11.10%	-14.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.32%	-0.78%	-2.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.77%	-2.36%	-3.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.37%	1.67%	+0.70%

Volatility

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Volatility Comparison

BMO MSCI Global Selection Equity Index ETF (ESGG.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.31% compared to PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.TO) at 1.98%. This indicates that ESGG.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFLS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ESGG.TO	PFLS.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.31%	1.98%	+1.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.59%	7.20%	+2.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.95%	9.20%	+2.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.40%	12.54%	+1.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.33%	13.40%	+2.93%

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESGG.TO has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than PFLS.TO's 6.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESGG.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Dividend Comparison

ESGG.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, while PFLS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ESGG.TO BMO MSCI Global Selection Equity Index ETF	0.88%	1.01%	1.20%	1.56%	1.82%	1.53%	1.87%
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.98%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESGG.TO and PFLS.TO in my portfolio?

ESGG.TO and PFLS.TO have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESGG.TO or PFLS.TO?

On fees, ESGG.TO is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESGG.TO or PFLS.TO?

ESGG.TO is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 6.48% for PFLS.TO.

What is the main difference between ESGG.TO and PFLS.TO?

ESGG.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while PFLS.TO is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: BMO and PICTON Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for ESGG.TO and 6.48% for PFLS.TO.