PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO
PFIA.TO (PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund) and FCLS.NEO (Fidelity Canadian Long/Short Alternative ETF) are both Long-Short funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PFIA.TO returned 3.30% vs 16.15% for FCLS.NEO. Their 0.10 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PFIA.TO charges 1.73%/yr vs 1.27%/yr for FCLS.NEO.
Performance
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFIA.TO achieves a 1.12% return, which is significantly lower than FCLS.NEO's 6.53% 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%
FCLS.NEO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- 6M
- 4.18%
- YTD
- 6.53%
- 1Y
- 16.15%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 16.97%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$7.59K | CA$6.88K | CA$11.81K | |
| CA$320.53K | CA$347.41K | CA$317.03K |
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
PFIA.TO PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund | 1.12% | 5.42% | 7.13% |
FCLS.NEO Fidelity Canadian Long/Short Alternative ETF | 6.53% | 18.33% | 17.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFIA.TO and FCLS.NEO 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024 | 0.10 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO — Risk / Return Rank
PFIA.TO
FCLS.NEO
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) and Fidelity Canadian Long/Short Alternative ETF (FCLS.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.
| PFIA.TO | FCLS.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.68 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.25 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.60 | 1.24 | +1.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.25 | 4.94 | +2.32 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFIA.TO drawdown since its inception was -17.12%, which is greater than FCLS.NEO's maximum drawdown of -14.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFIA.TO and FCLS.NEO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFIA.TO | FCLS.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.12% | -14.39% | -2.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.36% | -12.39% | +11.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.47% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -6.46% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.14% | -2.78% | +2.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.11% | -2.13% | +1.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.48% | 3.11% | -2.63% |
Volatility
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) is 0.68%, while Fidelity Canadian Long/Short Alternative ETF (FCLS.NEO) has a volatility of 3.37%. This indicates that PFIA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCLS.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFIA.TO | FCLS.NEO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.68% | 3.37% | -2.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.88% | 13.43% | -11.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.41% | 15.84% | -13.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.18% | 13.91% | -9.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.34% | 13.91% | -7.57% |
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFIA.TO has a 1.73% expense ratio, which is higher than FCLS.NEO's 1.27% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFIA.TO vs. FCLS.NEO - Dividend Comparison
PFIA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%, more than FCLS.NEO's 0.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCLS.NEO Fidelity Canadian Long/Short Alternative ETF | 0.61% | 0.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
PFIA.TO and FCLS.NEO 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.
On fees, FCLS.NEO is cheaper at 1.27% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FCLS.NEO is cheaper with a 1.27% expense ratio, compared with 1.73% for PFIA.TO.
They also come from different issuers: Picton and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 1.73% for PFIA.TO and 1.27% for FCLS.NEO.
Find the right allocation for PFIA.TO and FCLS.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