PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.TO
PFIA.TO (PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund) and PFLS.TO (PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund) are both Long-Short funds from Picton. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PFIA.TO returned 3.45%/yr vs 9.99%/yr for PFLS.TO. Their 0.03 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PFIA.TO charges 1.73%/yr vs 6.48%/yr for PFLS.TO.
Performance
PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.TO - 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 PFLS.TO's 7.25% 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%
PFLS.TO
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- -1.27%
- 6M
- 6.60%
- YTD
- 7.25%
- 1Y
- 15.35%
- 3Y*
- 13.73%
- 5Y*
- 9.99%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.62%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$320.53K | CA$347.41K | CA$317.03K | |
| CA$134.18K | CA$132.25K | CA$192.89K |
PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.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% | 5.67% |
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund | 7.25% | 13.69% | 19.22% | 6.68% | 0.48% | 18.51% | 16.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFIA.TO and PFLS.TO is 0.01, 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. | 0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2020 | 0.03 |
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. PFLS.TO — Risk / Return Rank
PFIA.TO
PFLS.TO
PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.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 PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.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 | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.29 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.60 | 2.11 | +0.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.25 | 8.72 | -1.47 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFIA.TO drawdown since its inception was -17.12%, which is greater than PFLS.TO's maximum drawdown of -11.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFIA.TO and PFLS.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFIA.TO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.12% | -11.82% | -5.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.36% | -6.98% | +5.62% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.47% | -9.40% | +7.93% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -6.46% | -11.10% | +4.64% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.14% | -1.65% | +1.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.11% | -2.35% | +1.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.48% | 1.68% | -1.20% |
Volatility
PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) is 0.68%, while PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.TO) has a volatility of 1.82%. This indicates that PFIA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PFLS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFIA.TO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.68% | 1.82% | -1.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.88% | 6.94% | -5.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.41% | 9.24% | -6.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.18% | 12.54% | -8.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.34% | 13.38% | -7.04% |
PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFIA.TO has a 1.73% expense ratio, which is lower than PFLS.TO's 6.48% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFIA.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Dividend Comparison
PFIA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%, while PFLS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFIA.TO PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund | 4.90% | 3.97% | 3.66% | 5.63% | 4.69% | 4.25% | 6.02% | 1.66% |
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.98% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PFIA.TO and PFLS.TO have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PFIA.TO is cheaper at 1.73% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PFIA.TO is cheaper with a 1.73% expense ratio, compared with 6.48% for PFLS.TO.
Their fees differ too: 1.73% for PFIA.TO and 6.48% for PFLS.TO.
Find the right allocation for PFIA.TO and PFLS.TO
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