PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (HEP.TO) and Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF (HLIT.TO).

HEP.TO and HLIT.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. HEP.TO is a passively managed fund by Horizons that tracks the performance of the Solactive North American Listed Gold Producers Index. It was launched on Apr 11, 2011. HLIT.TO is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the Solactive Global Lithium Producers Index. It was launched on Jun 22, 2021. Both HEP.TO and HLIT.TO are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (HEP.TO) and Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF (HLIT.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
HEP.TO
Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF		-1.36%126.50%20.18%6.19%-1.80%-3.16%
HLIT.TO
Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF		9.48%42.90%-43.73%-17.02%-5.87%46.00%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HEP.TO achieves a -1.36% return, which is significantly lower than HLIT.TO's 9.48% return.

HEP.TO

1D
0.07%
1M
-23.06%
YTD
-1.36%
6M
10.32%
1Y
65.25%
3Y*
37.98%
5Y*
23.17%
10Y*
16.29%

HLIT.TO

1D
1.25%
1M
-3.86%
YTD
9.48%
6M
44.95%
1Y
77.65%
3Y*
-12.21%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF

Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF

Often compared with HEP.TO:
HEP.TO vs. NRGY.TOHEP.TO vs. CPCC.TOHEP.TO vs. GLDX.TOHEP.TO vs. VOLX.TOHEP.TO vs. HXQ.TOHEP.TO vs. COPP.TOHEP.TO vs. HEQT.TO
Often compared with HLIT.TO:
HLIT.TO vs. LITHLIT.TO vs. CPCC.TOHLIT.TO vs. GLDX.TOHLIT.TO vs. NRGY.TOHLIT.TO vs. COPP.TOHLIT.TO vs. USCL.TOHLIT.TO vs. HBNK.TO

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HEP.TO has a 0.81% expense ratio, which is lower than HLIT.TO's 0.89% expense ratio.

HLIT.TO
Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF
HEP.TO
Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF

Return for Risk

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HEP.TO
HEP.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
HEP.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HEP.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
HEP.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
HEP.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
HEP.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
HLIT.TO
HLIT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
HLIT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HLIT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
HLIT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
HLIT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
HLIT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (HEP.TO) and Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF (HLIT.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.

HEP.TOHLIT.TODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.63

1.91

-0.28

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.98

2.43

-0.44

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.30

0.00

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.32

3.01

-0.69

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.85

8.73

+0.12

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HEP.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the HLIT.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HEP.TO and HLIT.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

HEP.TOHLIT.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63

1.91

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.17

0.00

+0.16

Correlation

The correlation between HEP.TO and HLIT.TO is 0.28, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Dividend Comparison

HEP.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.94%, more than HLIT.TO's 0.11% yield.

TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HEP.TO
Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF		0.94%2.16%10.30%11.16%10.08%6.31%6.47%4.58%5.62%7.08%9.20%11.62%
HLIT.TO
Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF		0.11%0.12%2.24%2.58%1.88%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HEP.TO drawdown since its inception was -71.13%, smaller than the maximum HLIT.TO drawdown of -77.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HEP.TO and HLIT.TO.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

HEP.TOHLIT.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.13%

-77.20%

+6.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.86%

-23.73%

-5.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.60%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.83%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-23.06%

-46.55%

+23.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-34.60%

-37.68%

+3.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.57%

8.35%

-0.78%

Volatility

HEP.TO vs. HLIT.TO - Volatility Comparison

Horizons Gold Producer Equity Covered Call ETF (HEP.TO) has a higher volatility of 15.60% compared to Global X Lithium Producers Index ETF (HLIT.TO) at 13.79%. This indicates that HEP.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HLIT.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period

HEP.TOHLIT.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.60%

13.79%

+1.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

34.44%

29.37%

+5.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

41.26%

40.95%

+0.31%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.16%

38.78%

-7.62%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.74%

38.78%

-7.04%