QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

QDAY.NEO (Hamilton EnhancedTechnology DayMAX™ ETF) and HPF.TO (Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units) are both exchange-traded funds - QDAY.NEO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Hamilton, while HPF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Harvest. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QDAY.NEO returned 47.32% vs 44.78% for HPF.TO. Their -0.17 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. QDAY.NEO charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for HPF.TO.

Performance

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Hamilton EnhancedTechnology DayMAX™ ETF (QDAY.NEO) and Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDAY.NEO achieves a 30.22% return, which is significantly lower than HPF.TO's 34.39% return.

QDAY.NEO

• 1D: 6.39%
• 1M: 2.14%
• 6M: 31.70%
• YTD: 30.22%
• 1Y: 47.32%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 46.34%

HPF.TO

• 1D: -2.27%
• 1M: 11.59%
• 6M: 22.42%
• YTD: 34.39%
• 1Y: 44.78%
• 3Y*: 13.75%
• 5Y*: 17.41%
• 10Y*: 5.59%
• ALL TIME*: 1.62%

*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)
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	CA$27.78K	CA$29.40K	CA$55.91K
QDAY.NEO Hamilton EnhancedTechnology DayMAX™ ETF	CA$429.00K	CA$183.86K	CA$63.29K

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QDAY.NEO Hamilton EnhancedTechnology DayMAX™ ETF	30.22%	14.84%
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	34.39%	3.67%

Correlation

The correlation between QDAY.NEO and HPF.TO is -0.18, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025	-0.17

Return for Risk

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDAY.NEO

QDAY.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 62
QDAY.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
QDAY.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
QDAY.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
QDAY.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
QDAY.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 51

HPF.TO

HPF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 81
HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
HPF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
HPF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 78
HPF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
HPF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hamilton EnhancedTechnology DayMAX™ ETF (QDAY.NEO) and Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.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.

	QDAY.NEO	HPF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.81	2.25	-0.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	2.87	-0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.37	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.47	3.75	-1.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.57	11.09	-4.51

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDAY.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDAY.NEO and HPF.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

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDAY.NEO drawdown since its inception was -19.44%, smaller than the maximum HPF.TO drawdown of -72.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDAY.NEO and HPF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDAY.NEO	HPF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.44%	-72.97%	+53.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.44%	-12.01%	-7.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.85%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-23.87%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-69.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.96%	-2.27%	+0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.15%	-26.17%	+21.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.27%	4.05%	+3.22%

Volatility

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Volatility Comparison

Hamilton EnhancedTechnology DayMAX™ ETF (QDAY.NEO) has a higher volatility of 10.38% compared to Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO) at 6.72%. This indicates that QDAY.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HPF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDAY.NEO	HPF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.38%	6.72%	+3.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.71%	16.51%	+5.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.57%	20.04%	+6.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.18%	23.55%	+2.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.18%	28.03%	-1.85%

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDAY.NEO has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than HPF.TO's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDAY.NEO vs. HPF.TO - Dividend Comparison

QDAY.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.94%, more than HPF.TO's 7.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units	7.75%	9.93%	9.80%	8.75%	6.58%	4.61%	15.32%	8.74%	8.78%	12.87%	13.58%	13.31%
QDAY.NEO Hamilton EnhancedTechnology DayMAX™ ETF	16.94%	8.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDAY.NEO and HPF.TO in my portfolio?

QDAY.NEO and HPF.TO have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QDAY.NEO or HPF.TO?

On fees, QDAY.NEO is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDAY.NEO or HPF.TO?

QDAY.NEO is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for HPF.TO.

What is the main difference between QDAY.NEO and HPF.TO?

QDAY.NEO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HPF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Hamilton and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for QDAY.NEO and 0.99% for HPF.TO.