PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PFIA.TO vs. QBTL.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PFIA.TO vs. QBTL.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 AGF US Market Neutral Anti-Beta CAD-Hedged ETF (QBTL.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PFIA.TO achieves a 1.12% return, which is significantly higher than QBTL.TO's -15.06% 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%

QBTL.TO

1D
0.78%
1M
6.72%
6M
-13.58%
YTD
-15.06%
1Y
-26.30%
3Y*
-9.01%
5Y*
-4.83%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
-7.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$320.53KCA$347.41KCA$317.03K
CA$48.21KCA$82.83KCA$92.70K

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


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
PFIA.TO
PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund
1.12%5.42%7.76%7.26%-3.42%3.17%9.26%1.30%
QBTL.TO
AGF US Market Neutral Anti-Beta CAD-Hedged ETF
-15.06%-21.84%12.22%-15.56%21.08%-8.37%-12.51%-7.06%

Correlation

The correlation between PFIA.TO and QBTL.TO is -0.03, 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.

-0.03

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.03

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

-0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2019

0.01

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. QBTL.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PFIA.TO
PFIA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
PFIA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
PFIA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

QBTL.TO
QBTL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
QBTL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QBTL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
QBTL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
QBTL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
QBTL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 33
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.

PFIA.TO vs. QBTL.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 AGF US Market Neutral Anti-Beta CAD-Hedged ETF (QBTL.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.TOQBTL.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

0.84

+0.45

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

-0.68

+3.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.25

-1.22

+8.47

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

The current PFIA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is higher than the QBTL.TO Sharpe Ratio of -1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFIA.TO and QBTL.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

PFIA.TO vs. QBTL.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFIA.TO drawdown since its inception was -17.12%, smaller than the maximum QBTL.TO drawdown of -54.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFIA.TO and QBTL.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PFIA.TOQBTL.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.12%

-54.72%

+37.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.36%

-36.08%

+34.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.47%

-49.31%

+47.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-6.46%

-49.31%

+42.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.14%

-48.87%

+48.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.11%

-25.32%

+24.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.48%

20.18%

-19.70%

Volatility

PFIA.TO vs. QBTL.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) is 0.68%, while AGF US Market Neutral Anti-Beta CAD-Hedged ETF (QBTL.TO) has a volatility of 7.40%. This indicates that PFIA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QBTL.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PFIA.TOQBTL.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.68%

7.40%

-6.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.88%

18.57%

-16.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.41%

24.14%

-21.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.18%

19.91%

-15.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.34%

20.03%

-13.69%

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

PFIA.TO has a 1.73% expense ratio, which is higher than QBTL.TO's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

PFIA.TO vs. QBTL.TO - Dividend Comparison

PFIA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%, while QBTL.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
PFIA.TO
PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund
4.90%3.97%3.66%5.63%4.69%4.25%6.02%1.66%
QBTL.TO
AGF US Market Neutral Anti-Beta CAD-Hedged ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%3.09%0.00%6.68%0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions


PFIA.TO and QBTL.TO have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QBTL.TO is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QBTL.TO is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 1.73% for PFIA.TO.

PFIA.TO is categorized as Long-Short, while QBTL.TO is Equity Market Neutral. They also come from different issuers: Picton and AGF. Their fees differ too: 1.73% for PFIA.TO and 0.55% for QBTL.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PFIA.TO and QBTL.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