FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO
FGLS.NEO (Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF) and CNAO.TO (CI Alternative North American Opportunities Fund) are both Long-Short funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FGLS.NEO returned 8.09% vs 12.19% for CNAO.TO. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. FGLS.NEO charges 1.51%/yr vs 1.21%/yr for CNAO.TO.
Performance
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FGLS.NEO achieves a 6.44% return, which is significantly higher than CNAO.TO's 5.63% return.
FGLS.NEO
- 1D
- 5.45%
- 1M
- 9.25%
- 6M
- 6.94%
- YTD
- 6.44%
- 1Y
- 8.09%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -3.78%
CNAO.TO
- 1D
- -1.36%
- 1M
- 1.26%
- 6M
- 5.41%
- YTD
- 5.63%
- 1Y
- 12.19%
- 3Y*
- 17.49%
- 5Y*
- 11.88%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.92%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$0.00 | CA$0.00 | CA$4.36K | |
| CA$98.45K | CA$628.31K | CA$493.48K |
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF | 6.44% | 8.38% | -21.20% |
CNAO.TO CI Alternative North American Opportunities Fund | 5.63% | 7.57% | 27.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between FGLS.NEO and CNAO.TO is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024 | -0.10 |
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
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO — Risk / Return Rank
FGLS.NEO
CNAO.TO
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) and CI Alternative North American Opportunities Fund (CNAO.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.
| FGLS.NEO | CNAO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.13 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 0.70 | -0.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.78 | 2.01 | -1.24 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FGLS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -25.89%, smaller than the maximum CNAO.TO drawdown of -27.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGLS.NEO and CNAO.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FGLS.NEO | CNAO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.89% | -27.39% | +1.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.12% | -19.73% | -1.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -22.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.39% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.21% | -4.45% | -4.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.41% | -7.02% | -7.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.39% | 6.89% | +3.50% |
Volatility
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) has a higher volatility of 12.93% compared to CI Alternative North American Opportunities Fund (CNAO.TO) at 6.73%. This indicates that FGLS.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNAO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FGLS.NEO | CNAO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.93% | 6.73% | +6.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.31% | 17.03% | +5.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.32% | 20.95% | +7.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.35% | 18.78% | +5.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.35% | 18.72% | +5.63% |
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FGLS.NEO has a 1.51% expense ratio, which is higher than CNAO.TO's 1.21% expense ratio.
Dividends
FGLS.NEO vs. CNAO.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither FGLS.NEO nor CNAO.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FGLS.NEO and CNAO.TO have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNAO.TO is cheaper at 1.21% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAO.TO is cheaper with a 1.21% expense ratio, compared with 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and CI Global Asset Management. Their fees differ too: 1.51% for FGLS.NEO and 1.21% for CNAO.TO.
Find the right allocation for FGLS.NEO and CNAO.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