PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO
PFMS.TO (Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF) and PFIA.TO (PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - PFMS.TO is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Picton, while PFIA.TO is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Picton. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PFMS.TO returned 6.24%/yr vs 3.45%/yr for PFIA.TO. Their 0.04 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PFMS.TO charges 4.83%/yr vs 1.73%/yr for PFIA.TO.
Performance
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFMS.TO achieves a 7.43% return, which is significantly higher than PFIA.TO's 1.12% return.
PFMS.TO
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- 1.57%
- 6M
- 3.65%
- YTD
- 7.43%
- 1Y
- 16.05%
- 3Y*
- 12.43%
- 5Y*
- 6.24%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 7.09%
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%
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$50.37K | CA$34.59K | CA$33.22K |
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFMS.TO Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF | 7.43% | 16.36% | 10.02% | 3.06% | -7.15% | 11.50% | 8.34% | 1.90% |
PFIA.TO PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund | 1.12% | 5.42% | 7.76% | 7.26% | -3.42% | 3.17% | 9.26% | 3.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFMS.TO and PFIA.TO is -0.04, 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. | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2019 | 0.04 |
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
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO — Risk / Return Rank
PFMS.TO
PFIA.TO
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF (PFMS.TO) and PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.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.
| PFMS.TO | PFIA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.29 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.18 | 2.60 | +0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.89 | 7.25 | +3.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFMS.TO drawdown since its inception was -23.00%, which is greater than PFIA.TO's maximum drawdown of -17.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFMS.TO and PFIA.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFMS.TO | PFIA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.00% | -17.12% | -5.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.07% | -1.36% | -3.71% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.36% | -1.47% | -3.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.11% | -6.46% | -6.65% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.16% | -0.14% | -1.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.79% | -1.11% | -2.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.48% | 0.48% | +1.00% |
Volatility
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Volatility Comparison
Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF (PFMS.TO) has a higher volatility of 1.55% compared to PICTON Long Short Income Alternative Fund (PFIA.TO) at 0.68%. This indicates that PFMS.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFIA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFMS.TO | PFIA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.55% | 0.68% | +0.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.85% | 1.88% | +3.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.30% | 2.41% | +6.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.67% | 4.18% | +7.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.69% | 6.34% | +7.35% |
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFMS.TO has a 4.83% expense ratio, which is higher than PFIA.TO's 1.73% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFMS.TO vs. PFIA.TO - Dividend Comparison
PFMS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFIA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%.
| 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% |
PFMS.TO Picton Multi-Strategy Alternative Fund ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PFMS.TO and PFIA.TO have a correlation of -0.04, 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 4.83% for PFMS.TO.
PFMS.TO is categorized as Multistrategy, while PFIA.TO is Long-Short. Their fees differ too: 4.83% for PFMS.TO and 1.73% for PFIA.TO.
Find the right allocation for PFMS.TO and PFIA.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