PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

PFIA.TO (PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund) and CMAR.TO (CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - PFIA.TO is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Picton, while CMAR.TO is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by CI. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PFIA.TO returned 3.45%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for CMAR.TO. Their 0.12 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PFIA.TO charges 1.73%/yr vs 1.03%/yr for CMAR.TO.

Performance

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) and CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund (CMAR.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PFIA.TO achieves a 1.12% return, which is significantly higher than CMAR.TO's 0.81% return.

PFIA.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.26%
• 6M: 0.57%
• YTD: 1.12%
• 1Y: 3.30%
• 3Y*: 5.89%
• 5Y*: 3.45%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.78%

CMAR.TO

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: -1.12%
• 6M: 0.06%
• YTD: 0.81%
• 1Y: 2.62%
• 3Y*: 4.62%
• 5Y*: 1.15%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 2.02%

*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)
CMAR.TO CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund	CA$10.20K	CA$15.64K	CA$16.14K
PFIA.TO PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund	CA$320.53K	CA$347.41K	CA$317.03K

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PFIA.TO PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund	1.12%	5.42%	7.76%	7.26%	-3.42%	3.17%	7.08%
CMAR.TO CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund	0.81%	4.98%	3.37%	5.33%	-8.32%	0.98%	6.73%

Correlation

The correlation between PFIA.TO and CMAR.TO is 0.09, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.09
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.13
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2020	0.12

Return for Risk

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PFIA.TO

PFIA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 62
PFIA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
PFIA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
PFIA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 63
PFIA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
PFIA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 58

CMAR.TO

CMAR.TO Risk / Return Rank: 32
CMAR.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
CMAR.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
CMAR.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 29
CMAR.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
CMAR.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) and CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund (CMAR.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.

	PFIA.TO	CMAR.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.47	0.73	+0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	1.06	+1.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.15	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	1.34	+1.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.25	5.02	+2.23

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PFIA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is higher than the CMAR.TO Sharpe Ratio of 0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFIA.TO and CMAR.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

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFIA.TO drawdown since its inception was -17.12%, which is greater than CMAR.TO's maximum drawdown of -12.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFIA.TO and CMAR.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	PFIA.TO	CMAR.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.12%	-12.07%	-5.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.36%	-1.92%	+0.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-1.47%	-4.80%	+3.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-6.46%	-12.07%	+5.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-1.34%	+1.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.11%	-2.82%	+1.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.48%	0.51%	-0.03%

Volatility

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) is 0.68%, while CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund (CMAR.TO) has a volatility of 1.08%. This indicates that PFIA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMAR.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PFIA.TO	CMAR.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.68%	1.08%	-0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.88%	2.20%	-0.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41%	3.56%	-1.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.18%	5.83%	-1.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.34%	5.36%	+0.98%

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PFIA.TO has a 1.73% expense ratio, which is higher than CMAR.TO's 1.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

PFIA.TO vs. CMAR.TO - Dividend Comparison

PFIA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%, more than CMAR.TO's 4.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CMAR.TO CI Marret Alternative Absolute Return Bond Fund	4.50%	4.42%	4.44%	4.39%	3.49%	2.93%	2.39%	0.00%
PFIA.TO PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund	4.90%	3.97%	3.66%	5.63%	4.69%	4.25%	6.02%	1.66%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PFIA.TO and CMAR.TO in my portfolio?

PFIA.TO and CMAR.TO have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PFIA.TO or CMAR.TO?

On fees, CMAR.TO is cheaper at 1.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PFIA.TO or CMAR.TO?

CMAR.TO is cheaper with a 1.03% expense ratio, compared with 1.73% for PFIA.TO.

What is the main difference between PFIA.TO and CMAR.TO?

PFIA.TO is categorized as Long-Short, while CMAR.TO is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Picton and CI. Their fees differ too: 1.73% for PFIA.TO and 1.03% for CMAR.TO.