PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

PDIV.TO (Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF) and FLVC.NEO (Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PDIV.TO is a Dividend fund actively managed by Purpose, while FLVC.NEO is a Canada Equities fund tracking the Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index. PDIV.TO is actively managed, while FLVC.NEO is passively managed. Over the past year, PDIV.TO returned 21.28% vs 36.38% for FLVC.NEO. Their 0.46 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PDIV.TO charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FLVC.NEO.

Performance

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF (PDIV.TO) and Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (FLVC.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PDIV.TO achieves a 11.04% return, which is significantly lower than FLVC.NEO's 21.78% return.

PDIV.TO

1D
0.00%
1M
1.59%
6M
9.14%
YTD
11.04%
1Y
21.28%
3Y*
12.15%
5Y*
8.19%
10Y*
9.12%
ALL TIME*
9.26%

FLVC.NEO

1D
0.33%
1M
3.35%
6M
21.86%
YTD
21.78%
1Y
36.38%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
24.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

FLVC.NEO

Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF
CA$134.83KCA$145.15KCA$488.47K

PDIV.TO

Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF
CA$121.14KCA$151.92KCA$204.94K

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024
PDIV.TO
Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF		11.04%14.66%7.54%
FLVC.NEO
Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF		21.78%21.15%13.79%

Correlation

The correlation between PDIV.TO and FLVC.NEO is 0.61, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2024

0.46

The correlation between PDIV.TO and FLVC.NEO shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (all time) to 0.61 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
PDIV.TO
FLVC.NEO

Financial Services

36.9%
43.0%

Technology

16.2%
2.0%

Energy

11.9%
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

7.8%
7.0%

Industrials

6.5%
13.7%

Healthcare

6.0%

-

Utilities

4.3%
10.8%

Basic Materials

3.6%
0.4%

Communication Services

3.5%
7.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
6.9%

Real Estate

-

-

Financial Services

PDIV.TO
36.9%
FLVC.NEO
43.0%

Technology

PDIV.TO
16.2%
FLVC.NEO
2.0%

Energy

PDIV.TO
11.9%
FLVC.NEO
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

PDIV.TO
7.8%
FLVC.NEO
7.0%

Industrials

PDIV.TO
6.5%
FLVC.NEO
13.7%

Healthcare

PDIV.TO
6.0%
FLVC.NEO

-

Utilities

PDIV.TO
4.3%
FLVC.NEO
10.8%

Basic Materials

PDIV.TO
3.6%
FLVC.NEO
0.4%

Communication Services

PDIV.TO
3.5%
FLVC.NEO
7.5%

Consumer Defensive

PDIV.TO
3.2%
FLVC.NEO
6.9%

Real Estate

PDIV.TO

-

FLVC.NEO

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF

Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF

Often compared with PDIV.TO:
PDIV.TO vs. HDIV.TOPDIV.TO vs. MNY.TOPDIV.TO vs. VDY.TOPDIV.TO vs. HYLD.TOPDIV.TO vs. SPYIPDIV.TO vs. PDC.TOPDIV.TO vs. PMIF.TO
Often compared with FLVC.NEO:
FLVC.NEO vs. FCRI.TOFLVC.NEO vs. XCV.TOFLVC.NEO vs. FLVI.NEOFLVC.NEO vs. QCE.TOFLVC.NEO vs. CBNK.TOFLVC.NEO vs. DMEC.TOFLVC.NEO vs. FCMI.TO

Return for Risk

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
PDIV.TO
PDIV.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
PDIV.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
PDIV.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank
FLVC.NEO
FLVC.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
FLVC.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLVC.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLVC.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
FLVC.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLVC.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF (PDIV.TO) and Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (FLVC.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.

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.

PDIV.TOFLVC.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.99
5.06

-2.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.10
7.66

-3.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

2.02

-0.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.98

12.45

-8.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.35

55.03

-37.68

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PDIV.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is lower than the FLVC.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 5.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PDIV.TO and FLVC.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...

Drawdowns

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PDIV.TO drawdown since its inception was -30.64%, which is greater than FLVC.NEO's maximum drawdown of -7.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PDIV.TO and FLVC.NEO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

PDIV.TOFLVC.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.64%

-7.89%

-22.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.27%

-3.21%

-2.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.82%

—

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.93%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.64%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.36%

-0.50%

+0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.31%

-0.80%

-3.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.21%

0.71%

+0.50%

Volatility

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF (PDIV.TO) is 2.04%, while Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (FLVC.NEO) has a volatility of 2.84%. This indicates that PDIV.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLVC.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

PDIV.TOFLVC.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.04%

2.84%

-0.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.58%

5.74%

-0.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.03%

7.91%

-0.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.07%

11.38%

-1.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.84%

11.38%

+2.46%

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PDIV.TO has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is higher than FLVC.NEO's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PDIV.TO vs. FLVC.NEO - Dividend Comparison

PDIV.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.66%, more than FLVC.NEO's 4.70% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLVC.NEO
Franklin Canadian Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF		4.70%4.96%0.95%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
PDIV.TO
Purpose Enhanced Dividend Fund ETF		11.66%11.23%12.35%11.84%6.38%5.59%6.33%5.85%6.80%25.71%5.38%8.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

PDIV.TO and FLVC.NEO have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

FLVC.NEO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for PDIV.TO.

PDIV.TO is categorized as Dividend, while FLVC.NEO is Canada Equities. They also come from different issuers: Purpose and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for PDIV.TO and 0.15% for FLVC.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PDIV.TO and FLVC.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