NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and Hamilton Energy YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (EMAX.TO).

NNRG.NEO and EMAX.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. NNRG.NEO is a passively managed fund by Ninepoint that tracks the performance of the S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index. It was launched on May 11, 2021. EMAX.TO is an actively managed fund by Hamilton Capital. It was launched on Feb 6, 2024.

Performance

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and Hamilton Energy YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (EMAX.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	37.70%	19.14%	15.82%
EMAX.TO Hamilton Energy YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF	31.32%	4.63%	3.60%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NNRG.NEO achieves a 37.70% return, which is significantly higher than EMAX.TO's 31.32% return.

NNRG.NEO

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: 17.91%
• YTD: 37.70%
• 6M: 51.12%
• 1Y: 54.48%
• 3Y*: 22.68%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMAX.TO

• 1D: -1.98%
• 1M: 11.00%
• YTD: 31.32%
• 6M: 31.82%
• 1Y: 30.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

NNRG.NEO has a 1.79% expense ratio, which is higher than EMAX.TO's 0.65% expense ratio.

NNRG.NEO

Ninepoint Energy ETF

EMAX.TO

Hamilton Energy YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF

Return for Risk

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

NNRG.NEO

NNRG.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 87
NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
NNRG.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
NNRG.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 90
NNRG.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
NNRG.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

EMAX.TO

EMAX.TO Risk / Return Rank: 59
EMAX.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
EMAX.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
EMAX.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 65
EMAX.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EMAX.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and Hamilton Energy YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (EMAX.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.

	NNRG.NEO	EMAX.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	1.16	+0.87
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	1.55	+0.93
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.24	+0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.78	1.54	+1.25
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.52	4.01	+4.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the EMAX.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NNRG.NEO and EMAX.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NNRG.NEO	EMAX.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.03	1.16	+0.87
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.07	0.81	+0.26

Correlation

The correlation between NNRG.NEO and EMAX.TO is 0.74, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Dividend Comparison

NNRG.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, less than EMAX.TO's 9.29% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	0.54%	0.37%	0.39%	0.38%	9.08%	1.92%
EMAX.TO Hamilton Energy YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF	9.29%	13.44%	12.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NNRG.NEO drawdown since its inception was -35.78%, which is greater than EMAX.TO's maximum drawdown of -27.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NNRG.NEO and EMAX.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	NNRG.NEO	EMAX.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.78%	-27.55%	-8.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.22%	-20.97%	+0.75%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.13%	-3.30%	+2.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.77%	-9.52%	-0.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.61%	8.03%	-1.42%

Volatility

NNRG.NEO vs. EMAX.TO - Volatility Comparison

Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) has a higher volatility of 5.95% compared to Hamilton Energy YIELD MAXIMIZER ETF (EMAX.TO) at 5.45%. This indicates that NNRG.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMAX.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NNRG.NEO	EMAX.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.95%	5.45%	+0.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.98%	13.03%	+2.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.95%	26.34%	+0.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.47%	22.14%	+12.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.47%	22.14%	+12.33%