HAPS vs. WINN

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

HAPS (Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF) and WINN (Harbor Long-Term Growers ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HAPS is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Human Capital Factor Small Cap Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while WINN is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Harbor. HAPS is passively managed, while WINN is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, HAPS returned 12.03%/yr vs 23.93%/yr for WINN. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HAPS charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.57%/yr for WINN.

Performance

HAPS vs. WINN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS) and Harbor Long-Term Growers ETF (WINN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HAPS achieves a 11.51% return, which is significantly higher than WINN's 8.60% return.

HAPS

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 1.27%
• YTD: 11.51%
• 6M: 13.23%
• 1Y: 29.51%
• 3Y*: 12.03%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

WINN

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 6.86%
• YTD: 8.60%
• 6M: 7.07%
• 1Y: 22.26%
• 3Y*: 23.93%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HAPS vs. WINN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HAPS Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF	11.51%	8.35%	4.08%	12.44%
WINN Harbor Long-Term Growers ETF	8.60%	14.31%	31.64%	27.72%

Correlation

The correlation between HAPS and WINN is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 14, 2023	0.56

The correlation between HAPS and WINN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

HAPS vs. WINN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HAPS	WINN
Financial Services	17.7%	5.1%
Healthcare	17.7%	6.8%
Technology	14.0%	49.2%
Industrials	13.5%	4.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	13.3%
Energy	7.2%	-
Real Estate	6.7%	0.4%
Basic Materials	6.6%	-
Communication Services	3.0%	15.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	2.9%
Utilities	2.4%	1.4%

Return for Risk

HAPS vs. WINN — Risk / Return Rank

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

HAPS

HAPS Risk / Return Rank: 53
HAPS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
HAPS Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
HAPS Omega Ratio Rank: 47
HAPS Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
HAPS Martin Ratio Rank: 56

WINN

WINN Risk / Return Rank: 33
WINN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
WINN Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
WINN Omega Ratio Rank: 37
WINN Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
WINN Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

HAPS vs. WINN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS) and Harbor Long-Term Growers ETF (WINN). 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.

	HAPS	WINN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	1.39	+0.36
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	1.94	+0.63
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.25	+0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.97	1.29	+1.67
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.00	4.05	+5.95
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HAPS vs. WINN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HAPS Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the WINN Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HAPS and WINN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HAPS	WINN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.75	1.39	+0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.63	-0.07

Drawdowns

HAPS vs. WINN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HAPS drawdown since its inception was -27.44%, smaller than the maximum WINN drawdown of -32.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAPS and WINN.

Drawdown Indicators

	HAPS	WINN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.44%	-32.07%	+4.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-18.06%	+8.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.44%	-23.66%	-3.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.26%	-0.68%	+0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.14%	-9.10%	+2.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.97%	5.77%	-2.80%

Volatility

HAPS vs. WINN - Volatility Comparison

Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS) has a higher volatility of 4.16% compared to Harbor Long-Term Growers ETF (WINN) at 3.71%. This indicates that HAPS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WINN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HAPS	WINN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.16%	3.71%	+0.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.71%	12.19%	-0.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.98%	16.09%	+0.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.83%	23.74%	-2.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.83%	23.74%	-2.91%

HAPS vs. WINN - Expense Ratio Comparison

HAPS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than WINN's 0.57% expense ratio.

Dividends

HAPS vs. WINN - Dividend Comparison

HAPS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, while WINN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
HAPS Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF	0.51%	0.57%	0.72%	0.42%	0.00%
WINN Harbor Long-Term Growers ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.06%	0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HAPS and WINN in my portfolio?

HAPS and WINN 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 is riskier, HAPS or WINN?

HAPS has higher volatility (4.16%) compared to WINN (3.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HAPS dropped -27.44% vs WINN's -32.07%.

Which ETF is better, HAPS or WINN?

On 3-year performance, WINN leads with 23.93% vs 12.03% for HAPS. On fees, WINN is cheaper at 0.57% per year. On volatility, WINN has been the lower-risk option at 3.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HAPS or WINN?

Over the 3-year period, WINN has performed better with a 23.93% return vs 12.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HAPS or WINN?

WINN is cheaper with a 0.57% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for HAPS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HAPS or WINN?

HAPS has the higher dividend yield at 0.51%, compared with 0.00% for WINN.

What is the main difference between HAPS and WINN?

HAPS is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while WINN is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for HAPS and 0.57% for WINN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HAPS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.39), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.