PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

PFAE.TO (PICTON Long Short Equity (130/30) Alternative Fund) and FGLS.NEO (Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF) are both Long-Short funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PFAE.TO returned 28.43% vs 8.09% for FGLS.NEO. At a correlation of -0.29, they often move in opposite directions. PFAE.TO charges 1.45%/yr vs 1.51%/yr for FGLS.NEO.

Performance

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in PICTON Long Short Equity (130/30) Alternative Fund (PFAE.TO) and Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PFAE.TO achieves a 12.75% return, which is significantly higher than FGLS.NEO's 6.44% return.

PFAE.TO

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 1.17%
• 6M: 8.12%
• YTD: 12.75%
• 1Y: 28.43%
• 3Y*: 23.18%
• 5Y*: 14.86%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.02%

FGLS.NEO

• 1D: 5.45%
• 1M: 9.25%
• 6M: 6.94%
• YTD: 6.44%
• 1Y: 8.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -3.78%

*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)
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF	CA$98.45K	CA$628.31K	CA$493.48K
PFAE.TO PICTON Long Short Equity (130/30) Alternative Fund	CA$123.45K	CA$195.19K	CA$237.15K

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PFAE.TO PICTON Long Short Equity (130/30) Alternative Fund	12.75%	25.47%	24.40%
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF	6.44%	8.38%	-21.20%

Correlation

The correlation between PFAE.TO and FGLS.NEO is -0.32, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	-0.29

Return for Risk

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PFAE.TO

PFAE.TO Risk / Return Rank: 83
PFAE.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
PFAE.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
PFAE.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
PFAE.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
PFAE.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 88

FGLS.NEO

FGLS.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 18
FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
FGLS.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FGLS.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 19
FGLS.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FGLS.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PICTON Long Short Equity (130/30) Alternative Fund (PFAE.TO) and Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.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.

	PFAE.TO	FGLS.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.95	0.29	+1.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.72	0.64	+2.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.07	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.83	0.38	+2.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.09	0.78	+12.31

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PFAE.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is higher than the FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 0.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFAE.TO and FGLS.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.

Drawdowns

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFAE.TO drawdown since its inception was -31.50%, which is greater than FGLS.NEO's maximum drawdown of -25.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFAE.TO and FGLS.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PFAE.TO	FGLS.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.50%	-25.89%	-5.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.08%	-21.12%	+11.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.84%	-9.21%	+8.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.74%	-14.41%	+10.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.18%	10.39%	-8.21%

Volatility

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PICTON Long Short Equity (130/30) Alternative Fund (PFAE.TO) is 2.56%, while Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) has a volatility of 12.93%. This indicates that PFAE.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FGLS.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PFAE.TO	FGLS.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.56%	12.93%	-10.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.20%	22.31%	-11.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.69%	28.32%	-13.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.41%	24.35%	-7.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.14%	24.35%	-6.21%

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PFAE.TO has a 1.45% expense ratio, which is lower than FGLS.NEO's 1.51% expense ratio.

Dividends

PFAE.TO vs. FGLS.NEO - Dividend Comparison

PFAE.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, while FGLS.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFAE.TO PICTON Long Short Equity (130/30) Alternative Fund	0.30%	0.34%	0.03%	0.69%	0.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PFAE.TO and FGLS.NEO in my portfolio?

PFAE.TO and FGLS.NEO have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PFAE.TO or FGLS.NEO?

On fees, PFAE.TO is cheaper at 1.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PFAE.TO or FGLS.NEO?

PFAE.TO is cheaper with a 1.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.

What is the main difference between PFAE.TO and FGLS.NEO?

They also come from different issuers: PICTON Investments and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 1.45% for PFAE.TO and 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.