FGEP.TO vs. PFLS.TO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

FGEP.TO (Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF) and PFLS.TO (PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FGEP.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while PFLS.TO is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Picton. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FGEP.TO returned 31.07% vs 15.35% for PFLS.TO. Their 0.53 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FGEP.TO charges 1.16%/yr vs 6.48%/yr for PFLS.TO.

Performance

FGEP.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF (FGEP.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, FGEP.TO achieves a 20.73% return, which is significantly higher than PFLS.TO's 7.25% return.

FGEP.TO

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 0.19%
• 6M: 16.06%
• YTD: 20.73%
• 1Y: 31.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 22.43%

PFLS.TO

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: -1.27%
• 6M: 6.60%
• YTD: 7.25%
• 1Y: 15.35%
• 3Y*: 13.73%
• 5Y*: 9.99%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.62%

*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)
FGEP.TO Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF	CA$1.06M	CA$1.09M	CA$1.04M
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund	CA$134.18K	CA$132.25K	CA$192.89K

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FGEP.TO Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF	20.73%	17.44%	9.88%
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund	7.25%	13.69%	9.89%

Correlation

The correlation between FGEP.TO and PFLS.TO is 0.57, 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.	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2024	0.53

The correlation between FGEP.TO and PFLS.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

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

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

FGEP.TO

FGEP.TO Risk / Return Rank: 92
FGEP.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
FGEP.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
FGEP.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 92
FGEP.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
FGEP.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 92

PFLS.TO

PFLS.TO Risk / Return Rank: 64
PFLS.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
PFLS.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
PFLS.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 64
PFLS.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
PFLS.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF (FGEP.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.

	FGEP.TO	PFLS.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.54	1.59	+0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.50	2.27	+1.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.29	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.07	2.11	+1.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.37	8.72	+7.65

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

The current FGEP.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is higher than the PFLS.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGEP.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

FGEP.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGEP.TO drawdown since its inception was -14.78%, 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 FGEP.TO and PFLS.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FGEP.TO	PFLS.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.78%	-11.82%	-2.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.14%	-6.98%	-0.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.40%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-11.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	-1.65%	+1.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.60%	-2.35%	+0.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.77%	1.68%	+0.09%

Volatility

FGEP.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF (FGEP.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.48% compared to PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.TO) at 1.82%. This indicates that FGEP.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

	FGEP.TO	PFLS.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.48%	1.82%	+1.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.26%	6.94%	+2.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.42%	9.24%	+2.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.71%	12.54%	+0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.71%	13.38%	-0.67%

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

FGEP.TO has a 1.16% expense ratio, which is lower than PFLS.TO's 6.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

FGEP.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Dividend Comparison

Neither FGEP.TO nor PFLS.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FGEP.TO Fidelity Global Equity+ Fund ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

FGEP.TO and PFLS.TO have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

On fees, FGEP.TO is cheaper at 1.16% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

FGEP.TO is cheaper with a 1.16% expense ratio, compared with 6.48% for PFLS.TO.

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

FGEP.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while PFLS.TO is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Picton. Their fees differ too: 1.16% for FGEP.TO and 6.48% for PFLS.TO.