LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

LIFE.TO (Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund) and LEAD.TO (Evolve Future Leadership Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - LIFE.TO is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Healthcare 20 Index Canadian Dollar Hedged, while LEAD.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Evolve Funds Group Inc.. LIFE.TO is passively managed, while LEAD.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, LIFE.TO returned 4.41%/yr vs 5.58%/yr for LEAD.TO. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LIFE.TO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.92%/yr for LEAD.TO.

Performance

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund (LIFE.TO) and Evolve Future Leadership Fund (LEAD.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LIFE.TO achieves a -1.74% return, which is significantly higher than LEAD.TO's -4.13% return.

LIFE.TO

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 3.88%
• 6M: -3.69%
• YTD: -1.74%
• 1Y: 6.84%
• 3Y*: 4.92%
• 5Y*: 4.41%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.58%

LEAD.TO

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: 1.87%
• 6M: -0.68%
• YTD: -4.13%
• 1Y: -3.93%
• 3Y*: 18.17%
• 5Y*: 5.58%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.63%

*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)
LEAD.TO Evolve Future Leadership Fund	CA$5.33K	CA$6.18K	CA$7.84K
LIFE.TO Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund	CA$360.47K	CA$315.51K	CA$445.64K

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
LIFE.TO Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund	-1.74%	12.76%	2.20%	4.15%	0.41%	19.76%	2.73%
LEAD.TO Evolve Future Leadership Fund	-4.13%	12.13%	38.23%	34.98%	-34.79%	14.98%	7.95%

Correlation

The correlation between LIFE.TO and LEAD.TO is 0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.13
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2020	0.22

The correlation between LIFE.TO and LEAD.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.10 (1 year) to 0.22 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

LIFE.TO

LIFE.TO Risk / Return Rank: 21
LIFE.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
LIFE.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
LIFE.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 21
LIFE.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
LIFE.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 20

LEAD.TO

LEAD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 10
LEAD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
LEAD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
LEAD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9
LEAD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
LEAD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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.

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund (LIFE.TO) and Evolve Future Leadership Fund (LEAD.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.

	LIFE.TO	LEAD.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.47	-0.18	+0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.80	-0.12	+0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	0.99	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.52	-0.15	+0.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.20	-0.33	+1.52

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIFE.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.47, which is higher than the LEAD.TO Sharpe Ratio of -0.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIFE.TO and LEAD.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

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIFE.TO drawdown since its inception was -20.04%, smaller than the maximum LEAD.TO drawdown of -39.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIFE.TO and LEAD.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	LIFE.TO	LEAD.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.04%	-39.80%	+19.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.29%	-22.65%	+9.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.33%	-22.65%	+6.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.33%	-39.80%	+23.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.67%	-9.30%	+4.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.35%	-13.81%	+9.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.73%	10.12%	-4.39%

Volatility

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Volatility Comparison

Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund (LIFE.TO) and Evolve Future Leadership Fund (LEAD.TO) have volatilities of 5.46% and 5.40%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LIFE.TO	LEAD.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.46%	5.40%	+0.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.16%	14.99%	-3.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.75%	18.57%	-3.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.62%	21.80%	-8.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.01%	21.02%	-6.01%

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

LIFE.TO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than LEAD.TO's 0.92% expense ratio.

Dividends

LIFE.TO vs. LEAD.TO - Dividend Comparison

LIFE.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.82%, more than LEAD.TO's 11.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
LEAD.TO Evolve Future Leadership Fund	11.67%	9.21%	5.84%	7.25%	9.02%	5.44%	1.48%	0.00%	0.00%
LIFE.TO Evolve Global Healthcare Enhanced Yield Fund	12.82%	11.83%	10.90%	9.24%	8.20%	6.46%	7.09%	6.33%	4.84%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LIFE.TO and LEAD.TO in my portfolio?

LIFE.TO and LEAD.TO have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LIFE.TO or LEAD.TO?

On fees, LIFE.TO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LIFE.TO or LEAD.TO?

LIFE.TO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.92% for LEAD.TO.

What is the main difference between LIFE.TO and LEAD.TO?

LIFE.TO is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while LEAD.TO is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for LIFE.TO and 0.92% for LEAD.TO.