HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

HLIF.TO (Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A) and HPF.TO (Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units) are both exchange-traded funds - HLIF.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Harvest, while HPF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Harvest. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, HLIF.TO returned 21.36%/yr vs 14.96%/yr for HPF.TO. Their 0.47 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. HLIF.TO charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for HPF.TO.

Performance

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.TO) and Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HLIF.TO achieves a 21.27% return, which is significantly lower than HPF.TO's 37.52% return.

HLIF.TO

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 3.17%
• 6M: 19.14%
• YTD: 21.27%
• 1Y: 38.56%
• 3Y*: 21.36%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.84%

HPF.TO

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 14.19%
• 6M: 28.39%
• YTD: 37.52%
• 1Y: 48.15%
• 3Y*: 14.96%
• 5Y*: 18.04%
• 10Y*: 6.10%
• ALL TIME*: 1.82%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A	CA$132.98K	CA$130.52K	CA$167.19K
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	CA$32.33K	CA$32.46K	CA$59.23K

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A	21.27%	25.43%	17.21%	6.13%	-2.97%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	37.52%	8.98%	-2.46%	2.51%	-2.96%

Correlation

The correlation between HLIF.TO and HPF.TO is 0.26, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2022	0.47

Over the past year, the correlation between HLIF.TO and HPF.TO has dropped to 0.26 - well below their long-term average of 0.47, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HLIF.TO	HPF.TO
Financial Services	40.6%	-
Energy	23.0%	100.0%
Utilities	13.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.8%	-
Basic Materials	6.6%	-
Communication Services	6.2%	-
Industrials	3.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

HLIF.TO

HLIF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 98
HLIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
HLIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
HLIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
HLIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
HLIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 98

HPF.TO

HPF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 87
HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
HPF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HPF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 86
HPF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
HPF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 83

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.TO) and Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.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.

	HLIF.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.19	2.33	+2.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.68	2.97	+4.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.04	1.38	+0.66
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	12.33	3.86	+8.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	61.76	11.43	+50.33

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HLIF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 5.19, which is higher than the HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HLIF.TO and HPF.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.

Drawdowns

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HLIF.TO drawdown since its inception was -11.12%, smaller than the maximum HPF.TO drawdown of -72.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HLIF.TO and HPF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HLIF.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.12%	-72.97%	+61.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.09%	-12.01%	+8.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.83%	-22.85%	+14.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-23.87%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-69.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.31%	0.00%	-0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.96%	-26.18%	+24.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.62%	4.05%	-3.43%

Volatility

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.TO) is 2.65%, while Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO) has a volatility of 6.16%. This indicates that HLIF.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HPF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HLIF.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.65%	6.16%	-3.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.01%	16.32%	-10.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.37%	19.91%	-12.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.38%	23.54%	-13.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.38%	28.03%	-17.65%

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

HLIF.TO has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than HPF.TO's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

HLIF.TO vs. HPF.TO - Dividend Comparison

HLIF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.03%, less than HPF.TO's 7.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A	6.03%	6.26%	7.33%	7.96%	3.91%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	7.58%	9.93%	9.80%	8.75%	6.58%	4.61%	15.32%	8.74%	8.78%	12.87%	13.58%	13.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HLIF.TO and HPF.TO in my portfolio?

HLIF.TO and HPF.TO have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HLIF.TO or HPF.TO?

On fees, HLIF.TO is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HLIF.TO or HPF.TO?

HLIF.TO is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for HPF.TO.

What is the main difference between HLIF.TO and HPF.TO?

HLIF.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HPF.TO is Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for HLIF.TO and 0.99% for HPF.TO.