XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO
XMW.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF) and PFLS.TO (PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - XMW.TO is a Global Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while PFLS.TO is a Long-Short fund actively managed by PICTON Investments. XMW.TO is passively managed, while PFLS.TO is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMW.TO returned 7.13%/yr vs 10.28%/yr for PFLS.TO. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMW.TO charges 0.48%/yr vs 6.48%/yr for PFLS.TO.
Performance
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMW.TO achieves a 5.79% return, which is significantly lower than PFLS.TO's 8.20% return.
XMW.TO
- 1D
- 1.00%
- 1M
- 0.91%
- 6M
- 4.93%
- YTD
- 5.79%
- 1Y
- 7.55%
- 3Y*
- 11.03%
- 5Y*
- 7.13%
- 10Y*
- 7.02%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.17%
PFLS.TO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.40%
- 6M
- 6.14%
- YTD
- 8.20%
- 1Y
- 16.31%
- 3Y*
- 14.01%
- 5Y*
- 10.28%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.84%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA$110.34K | CA$123.83K | CA$187.96K | |
| CA$124.60K | CA$121.48K | CA$132.62K |
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMW.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF | 5.79% | 5.84% | 20.05% | 4.68% | -4.33% | 12.80% | 1.82% |
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund | 8.20% | 13.69% | 19.22% | 6.68% | 0.48% | 18.51% | 16.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMW.TO and PFLS.TO is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2020 | 0.23 |
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
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO — Risk / Return Rank
XMW.TO
PFLS.TO
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (XMW.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.
| XMW.TO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.33 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.48 | 2.35 | -0.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.05 | 9.80 | -5.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMW.TO drawdown since its inception was -21.42%, 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 XMW.TO and PFLS.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMW.TO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.42% | -11.82% | -9.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.14% | -6.98% | +1.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.59% | -9.40% | +0.81% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.45% | -11.10% | -3.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -21.42% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.08% | -0.78% | -0.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.72% | -2.36% | -0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.87% | 1.67% | +0.20% |
Volatility
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF (XMW.TO) has a higher volatility of 2.46% compared to PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund (PFLS.TO) at 1.98%. This indicates that XMW.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFLS.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMW.TO | PFLS.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.46% | 1.98% | +0.48% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.72% | 7.20% | -1.48% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.73% | 9.20% | -1.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.72% | 12.54% | -3.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.04% | 13.40% | -2.36% |
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMW.TO has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than PFLS.TO's 6.48% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMW.TO vs. PFLS.TO - Dividend Comparison
XMW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, while PFLS.TO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFLS.TO PICTON Long Short Equity Alternative Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.98% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMW.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol Global Index ETF | 1.43% | 1.58% | 1.81% | 1.98% | 1.66% | 1.43% | 1.52% | 2.20% | 2.01% | 1.61% | 2.02% | 1.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMW.TO and PFLS.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.
On fees, XMW.TO is cheaper at 0.48% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMW.TO is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 6.48% for PFLS.TO.
XMW.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while PFLS.TO is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: iShares and PICTON Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for XMW.TO and 6.48% for PFLS.TO.
Find the right allocation for XMW.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