HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HBNK.TO (Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF) and BKCC.TO (Global X Equal Weight Canadian Bank Covered Call ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HBNK.TO is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks Index, while BKCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X. HBNK.TO is passively managed, while BKCC.TO is actively managed. Over the past year, HBNK.TO returned 60.09% vs 41.73% for BKCC.TO. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. HBNK.TO charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.84%/yr for BKCC.TO.

Performance

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (HBNK.TO) and Global X Equal Weight Canadian Bank Covered Call ETF (BKCC.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HBNK.TO achieves a 18.85% return, which is significantly higher than BKCC.TO's 14.24% return.

HBNK.TO

• 1D: -0.88%
• 1M: 5.21%
• YTD: 18.85%
• 6M: 24.41%
• 1Y: 60.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BKCC.TO

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 3.92%
• YTD: 14.24%
• 6M: 18.13%
• 1Y: 41.73%
• 3Y*: 22.19%
• 5Y*: 10.06%
• 10Y*: 9.35%

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

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HBNK.TO Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	18.85%	43.71%	24.77%	8.99%
BKCC.TO Global X Equal Weight Canadian Bank Covered Call ETF	14.24%	28.05%	17.14%	4.42%

Correlation

The correlation between HBNK.TO and BKCC.TO is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2023	0.96

The correlation between HBNK.TO and BKCC.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

HBNK.TO

HBNK.TO Risk / Return Rank: 96
HBNK.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
HBNK.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
HBNK.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
HBNK.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
HBNK.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

BKCC.TO

BKCC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 94
BKCC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
BKCC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
BKCC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 96
BKCC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
BKCC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (HBNK.TO) and Global X Equal Weight Canadian Bank Covered Call ETF (BKCC.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.

	HBNK.TO	BKCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.77	4.06	+0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.50	5.85	+0.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.88	1.80	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.13	5.75	+1.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	30.99	26.70	+4.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HBNK.TO Sharpe Ratio is 4.77, which is comparable to the BKCC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 4.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HBNK.TO and BKCC.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HBNK.TO	BKCC.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.77	4.06	+0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.79	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.55	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.66	0.00	+2.66

Drawdowns

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HBNK.TO drawdown since its inception was -14.78%, smaller than the maximum BKCC.TO drawdown of -41.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HBNK.TO and BKCC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HBNK.TO	BKCC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.78%	-41.18%	+26.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.48%	-7.30%	-1.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.16%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.02%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.30%	-1.42%	-0.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.33%	-5.91%	+3.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.95%	1.57%	+0.38%

Volatility

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Volatility Comparison

Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF (HBNK.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.00% compared to Global X Equal Weight Canadian Bank Covered Call ETF (BKCC.TO) at 3.59%. This indicates that HBNK.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BKCC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HBNK.TO	BKCC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.00%	3.59%	+1.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.26%	9.18%	+2.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.67%	10.31%	+2.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.70%	12.99%	-0.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.70%	16.99%	-4.29%

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HBNK.TO has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than BKCC.TO's 0.84% expense ratio.

Dividends

HBNK.TO vs. BKCC.TO - Dividend Comparison

HBNK.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%, less than BKCC.TO's 9.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BKCC.TO Global X Equal Weight Canadian Bank Covered Call ETF	9.52%	10.43%	12.30%	10.93%	8.23%	5.52%	5.92%	5.44%	6.24%	5.76%	5.79%	7.35%
HBNK.TO Global X Equal Weight Banks Index ETF	2.82%	3.24%	4.15%	2.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HBNK.TO and BKCC.TO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, HBNK.TO and BKCC.TO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, HBNK.TO or BKCC.TO?

On fees, HBNK.TO is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HBNK.TO or BKCC.TO?

HBNK.TO is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.84% for BKCC.TO.

What is the main difference between HBNK.TO and BKCC.TO?

HBNK.TO is categorized as Financials Equities, while BKCC.TO is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for HBNK.TO and 0.84% for BKCC.TO.