FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.TO
FGLS.NEO (Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF) and PFLS.TO (PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund) are both Long-Short funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FGLS.NEO returned 8.09% vs 16.31% for PFLS.TO. At a correlation of -0.30, they often move in opposite directions. FGLS.NEO charges 1.51%/yr vs 6.48%/yr for PFLS.TO.
Performance
FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FGLS.NEO achieves a 6.44% return, which is significantly lower than PFLS.TO's 8.20% 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%
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%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$98.45K | CA$628.31K | CA$493.48K | |
| CA$110.34K | CA$123.83K | CA$187.96K |
FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF | 6.44% | 8.38% | -21.20% |
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund | 8.20% | 13.69% | 16.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between FGLS.NEO and PFLS.TO is -0.38, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024 | -0.30 |
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. PFLS.TO — Risk / Return Rank
FGLS.NEO
PFLS.TO
FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.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 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.
| FGLS.NEO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.33 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 2.35 | -1.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.78 | 9.80 | -9.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FGLS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -25.89%, 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 FGLS.NEO and PFLS.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FGLS.NEO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.89% | -11.82% | -14.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.12% | -6.98% | -14.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.40% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -11.10% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.21% | -0.78% | -8.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.41% | -2.36% | -12.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.39% | 1.67% | +8.72% |
Volatility
FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.TO - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) has a higher volatility of 12.93% compared to PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.TO) at 1.98%. This indicates that FGLS.NEO'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FGLS.NEO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.93% | 1.98% | +10.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.31% | 7.20% | +15.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.32% | 9.20% | +19.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.35% | 12.54% | +11.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.35% | 13.40% | +10.95% |
FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FGLS.NEO has a 1.51% expense ratio, which is lower than PFLS.TO's 6.48% expense ratio.
Dividends
FGLS.NEO vs. PFLS.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither FGLS.NEO nor PFLS.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative 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
FGLS.NEO and PFLS.TO have a correlation of -0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FGLS.NEO is cheaper at 1.51% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FGLS.NEO is cheaper with a 1.51% expense ratio, compared with 6.48% for PFLS.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and PICTON Investments. Their fees differ too: 1.51% for FGLS.NEO and 6.48% for PFLS.TO.
Find the right allocation for FGLS.NEO and PFLS.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