NNRG.NEO vs. NXF.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NNRG.NEO (Ninepoint Energy ETF) and NXF.TO (CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)) are both Energy Equities funds. NNRG.NEO is passively managed, while NXF.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, NNRG.NEO returned 34.11%/yr vs 17.26%/yr for NXF.TO. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure.

Performance

NNRG.NEO vs. NXF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NNRG.NEO achieves a 47.23% return, which is significantly higher than NXF.TO's 31.66% return.

NNRG.NEO

• 1D: 1.12%
• 1M: -0.66%
• YTD: 47.23%
• 6M: 39.75%
• 1Y: 71.20%
• 3Y*: 26.98%
• 5Y*: 34.11%
• 10Y*: —

NXF.TO

• 1D: -0.58%
• 1M: -2.61%
• YTD: 31.66%
• 6M: 28.51%
• 1Y: 47.32%
• 3Y*: 15.61%
• 5Y*: 17.26%
• 10Y*: 8.00%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	47.23%	19.14%	13.26%	-4.21%	66.18%	55.91%
NXF.TO CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)	31.66%	9.19%	-4.66%	6.48%	43.93%	13.34%

Correlation

The correlation between NNRG.NEO and NXF.TO is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.77
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2021	0.80

The correlation between NNRG.NEO and NXF.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.81 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NNRG.NEO vs. NXF.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NNRG.NEO	NXF.TO
Energy	100.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

NNRG.NEO vs. NXF.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: 83
NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
NNRG.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
NNRG.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 81
NNRG.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
NNRG.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 74

NXF.TO

NXF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 75
NXF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
NXF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
NXF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 67
NXF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
NXF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. NXF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.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	NXF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.92	2.44	+0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.45	3.12	+0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.40	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.60	5.05	+1.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.91	14.32	-0.42
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. NXF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is comparable to the NXF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NNRG.NEO and NXF.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

	NNRG.NEO	NXF.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.92	2.44	+0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.99	0.74	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.31	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.08	0.22	+0.86

Drawdowns

NNRG.NEO vs. NXF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NNRG.NEO drawdown since its inception was -35.78%, smaller than the maximum NXF.TO drawdown of -65.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NNRG.NEO and NXF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	NNRG.NEO	NXF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.78%	-65.25%	+29.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.84%	-9.41%	-1.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.52%	-24.26%	+0.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.78%	-24.26%	-11.52%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.63%	-5.56%	+1.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.58%	-16.04%	+6.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.14%	3.31%	+1.83%

Volatility

NNRG.NEO vs. NXF.TO - Volatility Comparison

Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) has a higher volatility of 10.30% compared to CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged) (NXF.TO) at 7.56%. This indicates that NNRG.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NXF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NNRG.NEO	NXF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.30%	7.56%	+2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.65%	15.63%	+5.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.55%	19.53%	+5.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.60%	23.39%	+11.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.55%	26.15%	+8.40%

Dividends

NNRG.NEO vs. NXF.TO - Dividend Comparison

NNRG.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than NXF.TO's 8.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	0.51%	0.37%	0.39%	0.38%	9.08%	1.92%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NXF.TO CI Energy Giants Covered Call ETF Common Units (CAD Hedged)	8.09%	7.70%	8.50%	8.60%	11.22%	9.48%	11.23%	7.83%	9.38%	6.50%	8.24%	8.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NNRG.NEO and NXF.TO in my portfolio?

NNRG.NEO and NXF.TO have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

What is the main difference between NNRG.NEO and NXF.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Ninepoint and CI.