MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MNU-U.TO (Purpose USD Cash Management ETF) and HFR.TO (Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MNU-U.TO returned 3.61%/yr vs 4.48%/yr for HFR.TO. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MNU-U.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for HFR.TO.

Performance

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Purpose USD Cash Management ETF (MNU-U.TO) and Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

MNU-U.TO is traded in USD, while HFR.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the HFR.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MNU-U.TO achieves a 1.13% return, which is significantly higher than HFR.TO's 0.07% return.

MNU-U.TO

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.21%
• YTD: 1.13%
• 6M: 1.28%
• 1Y: 2.83%
• 3Y*: 3.61%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HFR.TO

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: -1.46%
• YTD: 0.07%
• 6M: 1.84%
• 1Y: 2.44%
• 3Y*: 4.48%
• 5Y*: 1.01%
• 10Y*: 2.54%

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

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MNU-U.TO Purpose USD Cash Management ETF	1.13%	2.98%	4.23%	2.87%
HFR.TO Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF	0.07%	9.03%	-1.55%	7.89%

Correlation

The correlation between MNU-U.TO and HFR.TO is 0.01, 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	0.01
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2023	0.00

Return for Risk

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MNU-U.TO

MNU-U.TO Risk / Return Rank: 99
MNU-U.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
MNU-U.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
MNU-U.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
MNU-U.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
MNU-U.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 99

HFR.TO

HFR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 95
HFR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
HFR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
HFR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 96
HFR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
HFR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose USD Cash Management ETF (MNU-U.TO) and Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.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.

	MNU-U.TO	HFR.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	7.16	0.53	+6.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	9.86	0.86	+9.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	3.65	1.10	+2.55
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	17.71	0.79	+16.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	96.29	1.93	+94.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MNU-U.TO Sharpe Ratio is 7.16, which is higher than the HFR.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MNU-U.TO and HFR.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MNU-U.TO	HFR.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.16	0.53	+6.63
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.15	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.28	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	6.00	0.09	+5.92

Drawdowns

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MNU-U.TO drawdown since its inception was -0.43%, smaller than the maximum HFR.TO drawdown of -38.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNU-U.TO and HFR.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MNU-U.TO	HFR.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.43%	-38.95%	+38.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.16%	-3.08%	+2.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.43%	-5.74%	+5.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-14.88%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.95%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.00%	-2.04%	+2.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.02%	-10.26%	+10.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.03%	1.27%	-1.24%

Volatility

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Purpose USD Cash Management ETF (MNU-U.TO) is 0.09%, while Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF (HFR.TO) has a volatility of 0.81%. This indicates that MNU-U.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HFR.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MNU-U.TO	HFR.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.09%	0.81%	-0.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.28%	3.50%	-3.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40%	4.60%	-4.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.61%	6.67%	-6.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.61%	9.17%	-8.56%

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MNU-U.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than HFR.TO's 0.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

MNU-U.TO vs. HFR.TO - Dividend Comparison

MNU-U.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, less than HFR.TO's 3.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HFR.TO Global X Active Ultra-Short Term Investment Grade Bond ETF	3.65%	3.76%	4.50%	5.67%	3.39%	1.29%	2.69%	2.61%	2.35%	2.12%	1.97%	2.13%
MNU-U.TO Purpose USD Cash Management ETF	2.79%	2.98%	4.25%	2.69%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MNU-U.TO and HFR.TO in my portfolio?

MNU-U.TO and HFR.TO have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MNU-U.TO or HFR.TO?

On fees, MNU-U.TO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MNU-U.TO or HFR.TO?

MNU-U.TO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for HFR.TO.

What is the main difference between MNU-U.TO and HFR.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for MNU-U.TO and 0.46% for HFR.TO.