HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO
HAL.TO (Global X Active Canadian Dividend ETF) and CLSA.TO (Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF) are both Canada Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, HAL.TO returned 42.29% vs 70.18% for CLSA.TO. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HAL.TO charges 0.67%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CLSA.TO.
Performance
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HAL.TO achieves a 17.28% return, which is significantly lower than CLSA.TO's 20.72% return.
HAL.TO
- 1D
- 1.49%
- 1M
- 3.85%
- YTD
- 17.28%
- 6M
- 20.97%
- 1Y
- 42.29%
- 3Y*
- 21.26%
- 5Y*
- 14.92%
- 10Y*
- 11.69%
CLSA.TO
- 1D
- 0.25%
- 1M
- 7.37%
- YTD
- 20.72%
- 6M
- 30.07%
- 1Y
- 70.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
HAL.TO Global X Active Canadian Dividend ETF | 17.28% | 27.02% |
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF | 20.72% | 56.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between HAL.TO and CLSA.TO is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025 | 0.47 |
The correlation between HAL.TO and CLSA.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO — Risk / Return Rank
HAL.TO
CLSA.TO
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Active Canadian Dividend ETF (HAL.TO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.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.
| HAL.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.93 | 1.96 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 8.26 | 6.54 | +1.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 37.67 | 28.01 | +9.66 |
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
| HAL.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.46 | 4.87 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.79 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.79 | 4.25 | -3.46 |
Drawdowns
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HAL.TO drawdown since its inception was -39.70%, which is greater than CLSA.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAL.TO and CLSA.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HAL.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.70% | -11.73% | -27.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.15% | -10.78% | +5.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.44% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.43% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.70% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.09% | +1.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.19% | -1.37% | -2.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.13% | 2.51% | -1.38% |
Volatility
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Active Canadian Dividend ETF (HAL.TO) is 2.48%, while Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.TO) has a volatility of 3.14%. This indicates that HAL.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLSA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HAL.TO | CLSA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.48% | 3.14% | -0.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.85% | 12.36% | -4.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.53% | 14.48% | -4.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.36% | 16.54% | -4.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.85% | 16.54% | -1.69% |
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
HAL.TO has a 0.67% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSA.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
HAL.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Dividend Comparison
HAL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.97%, less than CLSA.TO's 10.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF | 10.76% | 7.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HAL.TO Global X Active Canadian Dividend ETF | 1.97% | 2.37% | 2.79% | 3.60% | 4.84% | 2.99% | 3.56% | 2.96% | 3.43% | 3.17% | 2.84% | 3.19% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HAL.TO and CLSA.TO have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CLSA.TO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CLSA.TO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.67% for HAL.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Brompton Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.67% for HAL.TO and 0.60% for CLSA.TO.
Find the right allocation for HAL.TO and CLSA.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