USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO
USCC.TO (Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF) and HPF.TO (Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units) are both exchange-traded funds - USCC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Global X, while HPF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Harvest. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, USCC.TO returned 12.39%/yr vs 6.10%/yr for HPF.TO. Their 0.11 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. USCC.TO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for HPF.TO.
Performance
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, USCC.TO achieves a 11.09% return, which is significantly lower than HPF.TO's 37.52% return. Over the past 10 years, USCC.TO has outperformed HPF.TO with an annualized return of 12.39%, while HPF.TO has yielded a comparatively lower 6.10% annualized return.
USCC.TO
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- -1.00%
- 6M
- 9.29%
- YTD
- 11.09%
- 1Y
- 20.91%
- 3Y*
- 17.48%
- 5Y*
- 12.03%
- 10Y*
- 12.39%
- ALL TIME*
- 14.29%
HPF.TO
- 1D
- 0.38%
- 1M
- 14.19%
- 6M
- 28.39%
- YTD
- 37.52%
- 1Y
- 48.15%
- 3Y*
- 14.96%
- 5Y*
- 18.04%
- 10Y*
- 6.10%
- ALL TIME*
- 1.82%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$32.33K | CA$32.46K | CA$59.23K | |
| CA$305.43K | CA$290.99K | CA$294.56K |
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
USCC.TO Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF | 11.09% | 9.19% | 31.45% | 17.35% | -8.49% | 21.99% | 11.29% | 16.61% | 1.97% | 7.70% |
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units | 37.52% | 8.98% | -2.46% | 2.51% | 38.58% | 33.23% | -37.56% | 9.43% | -18.69% | -0.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between USCC.TO and HPF.TO is -0.15, 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. | -0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.07 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2014 | 0.11 |
The correlation between USCC.TO and HPF.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to 0.11 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
Technology
-
Financial Services
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
Technology
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Financial Services
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Communication Services
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Consumer Cyclical
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Healthcare
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Industrials
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Consumer Defensive
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Energy
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
Utilities
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Real Estate
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
Basic Materials
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
-
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
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO — Risk / Return Rank
USCC.TO
HPF.TO
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (USCC.TO) 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.
| USCC.TO | HPF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.38 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.84 | 3.86 | -1.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.17 | 11.43 | -0.27 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum USCC.TO drawdown since its inception was -28.40%, smaller than the maximum HPF.TO drawdown of -72.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USCC.TO and HPF.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| USCC.TO | HPF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.40% | -72.97% | +44.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.71% | -12.01% | +5.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.55% | -22.85% | +5.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.55% | -23.87% | +6.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.40% | -69.11% | +40.71% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.37% | 0.00% | -1.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.14% | -26.18% | +23.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.71% | 4.05% | -2.34% |
Volatility
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF (USCC.TO) is 3.44%, while Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO) has a volatility of 6.16%. This indicates that USCC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HPF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| USCC.TO | HPF.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.44% | 6.16% | -2.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.39% | 16.32% | -7.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.37% | 19.91% | -9.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.89% | 23.54% | -9.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.55% | 28.03% | -13.48% |
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
USCC.TO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than HPF.TO's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
USCC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Dividend Comparison
USCC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.64%, more than HPF.TO's 7.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HPF.TO Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units | 7.58% | 9.93% | 9.80% | 8.75% | 6.58% | 4.61% | 15.32% | 8.74% | 8.78% | 12.87% | 13.58% | 13.31% |
USCC.TO Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF | 9.64% | 10.20% | 9.86% | 11.45% | 10.42% | 5.05% | 5.17% | 5.16% | 6.19% | 5.56% | 5.59% | 5.71% |
Frequently Asked Questions
USCC.TO and HPF.TO have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, USCC.TO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
USCC.TO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for HPF.TO.
USCC.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HPF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for USCC.TO and 0.99% for HPF.TO.
Find the right allocation for USCC.TO and HPF.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