METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO
METE.TO (Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units) and HLIF.TO (Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, METE.TO returned -5.95% vs 36.13% for HLIF.TO. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. METE.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for HLIF.TO.
Performance
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, METE.TO achieves a -4.55% return, which is significantly lower than HLIF.TO's 15.41% return.
METE.TO
- 1D
- 5.47%
- 1M
- 4.67%
- YTD
- -4.55%
- 6M
- -2.86%
- 1Y
- -5.95%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HLIF.TO
- 1D
- -0.32%
- 1M
- 3.60%
- YTD
- 15.41%
- 6M
- 16.85%
- 1Y
- 36.13%
- 3Y*
- 19.93%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
METE.TO Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units | -4.55% | -0.67% |
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A | 15.41% | 25.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between METE.TO and HLIF.TO is 0.07, 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 | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2025 | 0.14 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
METE.TO
HLIF.TO
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units (METE.TO) and Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.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.
| METE.TO | HLIF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.16 | 5.30 | -5.46 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.02 | 7.94 | -7.92 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 2.10 | -1.10 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.17 | 11.74 | -11.91 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.36 | 60.41 | -60.77 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| METE.TO | HLIF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.16 | 5.30 | -5.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.09 | 1.45 | -1.54 |
Drawdowns
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum METE.TO drawdown since its inception was -40.10%, which is greater than HLIF.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for METE.TO and HLIF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| METE.TO | HLIF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.10% | -11.12% | -28.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.48% | -3.09% | -32.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.07% | -0.32% | -21.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.68% | -2.02% | -13.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.51% | 0.60% | +15.91% |
Volatility
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Volatility Comparison
Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units (METE.TO) has a higher volatility of 9.99% compared to Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A (HLIF.TO) at 2.17%. This indicates that METE.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HLIF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| METE.TO | HLIF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.99% | 2.17% | +7.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 28.26% | 5.77% | +22.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 36.57% | 6.85% | +29.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 42.08% | 10.47% | +31.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 42.08% | 10.47% | +31.61% |
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
METE.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than HLIF.TO's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
METE.TO vs. HLIF.TO - Dividend Comparison
METE.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 25.77%, more than HLIF.TO's 6.07% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HLIF.TO Harvest Canadian Equity Income Leaders ETF Class A | 6.07% | 6.26% | 7.33% | 7.96% | 3.91% |
METE.TO Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units | 25.77% | 21.31% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
METE.TO and HLIF.TO have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, METE.TO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
METE.TO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for HLIF.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Harvest Portfolios Group and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for METE.TO and 0.79% for HLIF.TO.
Find the right allocation for METE.TO and HLIF.TO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer