ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

ZWC.TO (BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF) and HPF.TO (Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units) are both exchange-traded funds - ZWC.TO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by BMO, while HPF.TO is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Harvest. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ZWC.TO returned 11.92%/yr vs 18.04%/yr for HPF.TO. Their 0.53 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ZWC.TO charges 0.91%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for HPF.TO.

Performance

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWC.TO) 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, ZWC.TO achieves a 15.08% return, which is significantly lower than HPF.TO's 37.52% return.

ZWC.TO

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: 2.51%
• 6M: 13.56%
• YTD: 15.08%
• 1Y: 30.50%
• 3Y*: 17.85%
• 5Y*: 11.92%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.50%

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%

*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$32.33K	CA$32.46K	CA$59.23K
ZWC.TO BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF	CA$2.06M	CA$2.11M	CA$2.33M

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ZWC.TO BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF	15.08%	22.79%	12.00%	7.54%	-3.53%	25.39%	-6.92%	17.32%	-10.05%	6.96%
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%	2.15%

Correlation

The correlation between ZWC.TO and HPF.TO is 0.25, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.25
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.39
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2017	0.53

Over the past year, the correlation between ZWC.TO and HPF.TO has dropped to 0.25 - well below their long-term average of 0.53, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ZWC.TO	HPF.TO
Financial Services	40.5%	-
Energy	22.9%	100.0%
Basic Materials	11.0%	-
Utilities	8.9%	-
Industrials	5.7%	-
Communication Services	5.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	4.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.0%	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZWC.TO

ZWC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 96
ZWC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
ZWC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
ZWC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 96
ZWC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ZWC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

HPF.TO

HPF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 87
HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
HPF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HPF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 86
HPF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
HPF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWC.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.

	ZWC.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.60	2.33	+1.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.98	2.97	+2.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.66	1.38	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.02	3.86	+1.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.07	11.43	+12.64

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZWC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.60, which is higher than the HPF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZWC.TO 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

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZWC.TO drawdown since its inception was -40.57%, smaller than the maximum HPF.TO drawdown of -72.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZWC.TO and HPF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZWC.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.57%	-72.97%	+32.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.99%	-12.01%	+6.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.09%	-22.85%	+13.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.43%	-23.87%	+7.44%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-69.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.61%	0.00%	-0.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.62%	-26.18%	+21.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	4.05%	-2.80%

Volatility

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF (ZWC.TO) is 2.31%, while Harvest Energy Leaders Income ETF – Class A Units (HPF.TO) has a volatility of 6.16%. This indicates that ZWC.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.

Volatility by Period

	ZWC.TO	HPF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.31%	6.16%	-3.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.95%	16.32%	-9.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.35%	19.91%	-11.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.16%	23.54%	-13.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.85%	28.03%	-13.18%

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZWC.TO has a 0.91% expense ratio, which is lower than HPF.TO's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

ZWC.TO vs. HPF.TO - Dividend Comparison

ZWC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.68%, less 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%
ZWC.TO BMO CA High Dividend Covered Call ETF	5.68%	5.92%	6.73%	7.62%	7.01%	6.60%	8.15%	6.92%	7.11%	5.46%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

ZWC.TO and HPF.TO have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ZWC.TO or HPF.TO?

On fees, ZWC.TO is cheaper at 0.91% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZWC.TO or HPF.TO?

ZWC.TO is cheaper with a 0.91% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for HPF.TO.

What is the main difference between ZWC.TO and HPF.TO?

ZWC.TO is categorized as Derivative Income, while HPF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Harvest. Their fees differ too: 0.91% for ZWC.TO and 0.99% for HPF.TO.