PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

PDF.TO (Purpose Core Dividend Fund) and CLSA.TO (Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF) are both Dividend funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PDF.TO returned 33.26% vs 86.40% for CLSA.TO. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PDF.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CLSA.TO.

Performance

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Purpose Core Dividend Fund (PDF.TO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PDF.TO achieves a 20.07% return, which is significantly lower than CLSA.TO's 41.36% return.

PDF.TO

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 2.88%
• 6M: 16.53%
• YTD: 20.07%
• 1Y: 33.26%
• 3Y*: 18.64%
• 5Y*: 12.14%
• 10Y*: 9.50%
• ALL TIME*: 10.45%

CLSA.TO

• 1D: 0.81%
• 1M: 5.82%
• 6M: 39.25%
• YTD: 41.36%
• 1Y: 86.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 81.29%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF	CA$412.76K	CA$362.20K	CA$278.07K
PDF.TO Purpose Core Dividend Fund	CA$201.50K	CA$240.90K	CA$226.04K

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PDF.TO Purpose Core Dividend Fund	20.07%	15.67%
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF	41.36%	57.14%

Correlation

The correlation between PDF.TO and CLSA.TO is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2025	0.58

The correlation between PDF.TO and CLSA.TO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PDF.TO

PDF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 97
PDF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
PDF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PDF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PDF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
PDF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

CLSA.TO

CLSA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 98
CLSA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
CLSA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
CLSA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
CLSA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLSA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose Core Dividend Fund (PDF.TO) and Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	PDF.TO	CLSA.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.99	5.96	-1.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.81	6.78	-0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.74	2.14	-0.40
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.26	8.06	-2.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.86	35.07	-11.21

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PDF.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.99, which is lower than the CLSA.TO Sharpe Ratio of 5.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PDF.TO and CLSA.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.

Drawdowns

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PDF.TO drawdown since its inception was -36.00%, which is greater than CLSA.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PDF.TO and CLSA.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PDF.TO	CLSA.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.00%	-11.73%	-24.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.35%	-10.78%	+4.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.28%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.81%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.51%	-1.01%	+0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.45%	-1.25%	-2.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.40%	2.47%	-1.07%

Volatility

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Purpose Core Dividend Fund (PDF.TO) is 2.48%, while Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF (CLSA.TO) has a volatility of 4.08%. This indicates that PDF.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLSA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PDF.TO	CLSA.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.48%	4.08%	-1.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.86%	12.82%	-5.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.38%	14.59%	-6.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.33%	16.24%	-5.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.58%	16.24%	-2.66%

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PDF.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than CLSA.TO's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

PDF.TO vs. CLSA.TO - Dividend Comparison

PDF.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, less than CLSA.TO's 9.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLSA.TO Brompton Split Corp. Enhanced Equity Income ETF	9.71%	7.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PDF.TO Purpose Core Dividend Fund	2.79%	3.49%	3.82%	4.17%	3.77%	3.19%	3.84%	3.65%	4.33%	3.50%	3.38%	3.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PDF.TO and CLSA.TO in my portfolio?

PDF.TO and CLSA.TO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PDF.TO or CLSA.TO?

On fees, CLSA.TO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PDF.TO or CLSA.TO?

CLSA.TO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for PDF.TO.

What is the main difference between PDF.TO and CLSA.TO?

They also come from different issuers: Purpose Investments Inc. and Brompton Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for PDF.TO and 0.60% for CLSA.TO.