METE.TO vs. TXF.TO
METE.TO (Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units) and TXF.TO (CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common) are both exchange-traded funds - METE.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Harvest Portfolios Group, while TXF.TO is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by CI Investments. Both are actively managed. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. METE.TO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for TXF.TO.
Performance
METE.TO vs. TXF.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
METE.TO
- 1D
- 2.55%
- 1M
- 14.95%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TXF.TO
- 1D
- -1.98%
- 1M
- -7.43%
- 6M
- 18.40%
- YTD
- 20.80%
- 1Y
- 42.15%
- 3Y*
- 27.15%
- 5Y*
- 15.76%
- 10Y*
- 18.45%
METE.TO vs. TXF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
METE.TO Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units | 13.78% |
TXF.TO CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common | 18.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between METE.TO and TXF.TO is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 20, 2026 | 0.30 |
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. TXF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
METE.TO
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
TXF.TO
METE.TO vs. TXF.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 CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common (TXF.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.
| METE.TO | TXF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.74 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 9.24 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
METE.TO vs. TXF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum METE.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.37%, smaller than the maximum TXF.TO drawdown of -41.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for METE.TO and TXF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| METE.TO | TXF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.37% | -41.23% | +12.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -15.43% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -27.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -41.23% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.70% | -8.31% | +3.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.96% | -6.17% | -6.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 4.57% | — |
Volatility
METE.TO vs. TXF.TO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| METE.TO | TXF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 12.16% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 21.48% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 44.59% | 24.54% | +20.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 44.59% | 25.44% | +19.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.59% | 23.91% | +20.68% |
METE.TO vs. TXF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
METE.TO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than TXF.TO's 0.71% expense ratio.
Dividends
METE.TO vs. TXF.TO - Dividend Comparison
METE.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.17%, more than TXF.TO's 9.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
METE.TO Harvest Meta Enhanced High Income Shares ETF - Class A Units | 11.17% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TXF.TO CI Tech Giants Covered Call Common | 9.40% | 10.59% | 9.75% | 7.48% | 14.13% | 7.77% | 11.01% | 7.29% | 9.29% | 4.89% | 6.16% | 6.15% |
Frequently Asked Questions
METE.TO and TXF.TO have a correlation of 0.30, 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 0.71% for TXF.TO.
METE.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while TXF.TO is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Harvest Portfolios Group and CI Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for METE.TO and 0.71% for TXF.TO.
Find the right allocation for METE.TO and TXF.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