PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Purpose USD Cash Management ETF (MNU-U.TO) and Evolve High Interest Savings Account ETF (HISA.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MNU-U.TO having a 1.13% return and HISA.NEO slightly lower at 1.10%.


MNU-U.TO

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

HISA.NEO

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
1.10%
6M
2.97%
1Y
2.48%
3Y*
2.94%
5Y*
0.27%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
MNU-U.TO
Purpose USD Cash Management ETF
1.13%2.98%4.23%2.87%
HISA.NEO
Evolve High Interest Savings Account ETF
1.10%7.20%-4.42%5.81%

Correlation

The correlation between MNU-U.TO and HISA.NEO is 0.00, 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

0.00

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

0.01

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

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO — 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: 9999
Overall Rank
MNU-U.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MNU-U.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
MNU-U.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
MNU-U.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
MNU-U.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank

HISA.NEO
HISA.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
HISA.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HISA.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
HISA.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
HISA.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
HISA.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
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. HISA.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose USD Cash Management ETF (MNU-U.TO) and Evolve High Interest Savings Account ETF (HISA.NEO). 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.TOHISA.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+6.79

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+9.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

3.65

1.15

+2.50

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

17.71

0.26

+17.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

96.29

0.52

+95.77

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MNU-U.TO Sharpe Ratio is 7.16, which is higher than the HISA.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 0.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MNU-U.TO and HISA.NEO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MNU-U.TOHISA.NEODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.16

0.37

+6.79

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

6.00

0.14

+5.87

Drawdowns

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MNU-U.TO drawdown since its inception was -0.43%, smaller than the maximum HISA.NEO drawdown of -11.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNU-U.TO and HISA.NEO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MNU-U.TOHISA.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.43%

-11.90%

+11.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.16%

-2.96%

+2.80%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.43%

-6.40%

+5.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.00%

-0.79%

+0.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.02%

-4.03%

+4.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.03%

1.22%

-1.19%

Volatility

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Purpose USD Cash Management ETF (MNU-U.TO) is 0.09%, while Evolve High Interest Savings Account ETF (HISA.NEO) has a volatility of 0.45%. This indicates that MNU-U.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HISA.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MNU-U.TOHISA.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.09%

0.45%

-0.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.28%

1.16%

-0.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40%

4.58%

-4.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.61%

6.41%

-5.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.61%

6.75%

-6.14%

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MNU-U.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than HISA.NEO's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

MNU-U.TO vs. HISA.NEO - Dividend Comparison

MNU-U.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, more than HISA.NEO's 2.27% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
HISA.NEO
Evolve High Interest Savings Account ETF
2.27%2.32%3.65%4.60%2.22%0.52%0.84%0.76%
MNU-U.TO
Purpose USD Cash Management ETF
2.79%2.98%4.25%2.69%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MNU-U.TO and HISA.NEO have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HISA.NEO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HISA.NEO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for MNU-U.TO.

MNU-U.TO is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while HISA.NEO is Money Market. They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments and Evolve. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for MNU-U.TO and 0.15% for HISA.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MNU-U.TO and HISA.NEO

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