MNU-U.TO vs. UBIL-U.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MNU-U.TO (Purpose USD Cash Management ETF) and UBIL-U.TO (Global X 0-3 Month U.S. T-Bill ETF USD) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MNU-U.TO returned 3.61%/yr vs 3.35%/yr for UBIL-U.TO. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MNU-U.TO charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for UBIL-U.TO.

Performance

MNU-U.TO vs. UBIL-U.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 0-3 Month U.S. T-Bill ETF USD (UBIL-U.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MNU-U.TO having a 1.13% return and UBIL-U.TO slightly lower at 1.08%.

MNU-U.TO

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

UBIL-U.TO

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.23%
• YTD: 1.08%
• 6M: 1.34%
• 1Y: 2.84%
• 3Y*: 3.35%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MNU-U.TO vs. UBIL-U.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%
UBIL-U.TO Global X 0-3 Month U.S. T-Bill ETF USD	1.08%	2.99%	3.74%	2.57%

Correlation

The correlation between MNU-U.TO and UBIL-U.TO is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2023	0.06

The correlation between MNU-U.TO and UBIL-U.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.21 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MNU-U.TO vs. UBIL-U.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

UBIL-U.TO

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

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. UBIL-U.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 0-3 Month U.S. T-Bill ETF USD (UBIL-U.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	UBIL-U.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	7.16	8.69	-1.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	9.86	15.05	-5.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	3.65	4.16	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	17.71	36.27	-18.56
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	96.29	152.88	-56.59
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. UBIL-U.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MNU-U.TO Sharpe Ratio is 7.16, which is comparable to the UBIL-U.TO Sharpe Ratio of 8.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MNU-U.TO and UBIL-U.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	UBIL-U.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.16	8.69	-1.53
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	6.00	7.31	-1.31

Drawdowns

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

The maximum MNU-U.TO drawdown since its inception was -0.43%, which is greater than UBIL-U.TO's maximum drawdown of -0.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNU-U.TO and UBIL-U.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MNU-U.TO	UBIL-U.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.43%	-0.20%	-0.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.16%	-0.08%	-0.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.43%	-0.13%	-0.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.02%	-0.01%	-0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.03%	0.02%	+0.01%

Volatility

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

The current volatility for Purpose USD Cash Management ETF (MNU-U.TO) is 0.09%, while Global X 0-3 Month U.S. T-Bill ETF USD (UBIL-U.TO) has a volatility of 0.12%. This indicates that MNU-U.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UBIL-U.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MNU-U.TO	UBIL-U.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.09%	0.12%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.28%	0.23%	+0.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40%	0.33%	+0.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.61%	0.46%	+0.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.61%	0.46%	+0.15%

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

MNU-U.TO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than UBIL-U.TO's 0.12% 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. UBIL-U.TO - Dividend Comparison

MNU-U.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, more than UBIL-U.TO's 2.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MNU-U.TO Purpose USD Cash Management ETF	2.79%	2.98%	4.25%	2.69%
UBIL-U.TO Global X 0-3 Month U.S. T-Bill ETF USD	2.72%	2.97%	3.68%	2.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

MNU-U.TO and UBIL-U.TO have a correlation of 0.21, 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 UBIL-U.TO?

On fees, UBIL-U.TO is cheaper at 0.12% 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 UBIL-U.TO?

UBIL-U.TO is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for MNU-U.TO.

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

They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for MNU-U.TO and 0.12% for UBIL-U.TO.