HUTE.TO vs. HPF.TO

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

HUTE.TO (Harvest Equal Weight Global Utilities Enhanced Income ETF) and HPF.TO (Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units) are both exchange-traded funds - HUTE.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, HUTE.TO returned 17.99%/yr vs 13.75%/yr for HPF.TO. Their 0.22 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. HUTE.TO charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for HPF.TO.

Performance

HUTE.TO vs. HPF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Harvest Equal Weight Global Utilities Enhanced Income ETF (HUTE.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, HUTE.TO achieves a 11.73% return, which is significantly lower than HPF.TO's 34.39% return.

HUTE.TO

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.64%
• 6M: 5.06%
• YTD: 11.73%
• 1Y: 15.60%
• 3Y*: 17.99%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.04%

HPF.TO

• 1D: -2.27%
• 1M: 11.59%
• 6M: 22.42%
• YTD: 34.39%
• 1Y: 44.78%
• 3Y*: 13.75%
• 5Y*: 17.41%
• 10Y*: 5.59%
• ALL TIME*: 1.62%

*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)
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	CA$27.78K	CA$29.40K	CA$55.91K
HUTE.TO Harvest Equal Weight Global Utilities Enhanced Income ETF	CA$290.11K	CA$245.72K	CA$284.03K

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
HUTE.TO Harvest Equal Weight Global Utilities Enhanced Income ETF	11.73%	19.04%	18.16%	0.10%	0.94%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	34.39%	8.98%	-2.46%	2.51%	3.16%

Correlation

The correlation between HUTE.TO and HPF.TO is 0.18, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 26, 2022	0.22

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

Sectors	HUTE.TO	HPF.TO
Utilities	40.5%	-
Communication Services	40.3%	-
Energy	15.8%	100.0%
Industrials	3.4%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

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

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

HUTE.TO

HUTE.TO Risk / Return Rank: 47
HUTE.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
HUTE.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
HUTE.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 42
HUTE.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
HUTE.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 48

HPF.TO

HPF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 81
HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
HPF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
HPF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 78
HPF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
HPF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harvest Equal Weight Global Utilities Enhanced Income ETF (HUTE.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.

	HUTE.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.25	2.25	-1.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.81	2.87	-1.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.37	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.29	3.75	-1.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.16	11.09	-4.93

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

The current HUTE.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is lower than the HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HUTE.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

HUTE.TO vs. HPF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HUTE.TO drawdown since its inception was -18.35%, smaller than the maximum HPF.TO drawdown of -72.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HUTE.TO and HPF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	HUTE.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.35%	-72.97%	+54.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.85%	-12.01%	+5.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.20%	-22.85%	+11.65%
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	-5.03%	-2.27%	-2.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.91%	-26.17%	+22.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.54%	4.05%	-1.51%

Volatility

HUTE.TO vs. HPF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Harvest Equal Weight Global Utilities Enhanced Income ETF (HUTE.TO) is 4.70%, while Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO) has a volatility of 6.72%. This indicates that HUTE.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

	HUTE.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.70%	6.72%	-2.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.00%	16.51%	-5.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.61%	20.04%	-7.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.64%	23.55%	-8.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.64%	28.03%	-13.39%

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

HUTE.TO has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than HPF.TO's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

HUTE.TO vs. HPF.TO - Dividend Comparison

HUTE.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.54%, more than HPF.TO's 7.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	7.75%	9.93%	9.80%	8.75%	6.58%	4.61%	15.32%	8.74%	8.78%	12.87%	13.58%	13.31%
HUTE.TO Harvest Equal Weight Global Utilities Enhanced Income ETF	9.54%	9.64%	10.24%	10.72%	1.61%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

HUTE.TO and HPF.TO have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

On fees, HUTE.TO is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

HUTE.TO is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for HPF.TO.

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

HUTE.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HPF.TO is Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for HUTE.TO and 0.99% for HPF.TO.