VS
When evaluating costs, PFLS features a management fee (MER) of 0.95%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, PFLS has returned 6.46% year-to-date with -$2 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 30.27% with -$484 M. Use the comparison tool below to benchmark these funds across top 10 holdings, yield, sector weights and historical returns.
NAV Performance and Flows
Key Data
Compare
PFLS
HBNK
| AuM | $147.26 M | $749.76 M |
| Management Fees | 0.95% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 6.48% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.35% |
Historical performance and flows
As of September 14, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | PFLS | -2.78% | -1.71% | +6.46% | +9.90% | +45.18% |
HBNK | -4.54% | +3.63% | +30.27% | +49.73% | +154.99% | |
| Flows | PFLS | +$1 M | +$13 M | -$2 M | -$8 M | +$61 M |
HBNK | +$35 M | -$69 M | -$484 M | -$672 M | -$81 M |
PFLS vs HBNK exposure
Countries
PFLS
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
99.59%
Sectors
PFLS
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Finance
99.59%
As of September 14, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
PFLS
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Royal Bank of Canada
17.26%
Bank of Montreal
17.04%
The Toronto-Dominion Bank
16.90%
The Bank of Nova Scotia
16.41%
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
16.05%
National Bank of Canada
15.93%
Diversification
PFLS
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.59%
Characteristics
Compare
PFLS
HBNK
| Provider | Picton Mahoney | Global X |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 2.64% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | July 15, 2020 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about PFLS and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: PFLS or HBNK?
As of September 14, 2026, PFLS has returned 6.46% year to date, while HBNK has returned 30.27%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: PFLS or HBNK?
As of September 14, 2026, PFLS manages $147.26 M in assets, while HBNK manages $749.76 M. HBNK is the larger fund by AUM.
How are PFLS and HBNK managed?
PFLS is actively managed by Picton Mahoney. It does not track an index. HBNK is passively managed by Global X. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: PFLS or HBNK?
Year to date, PFLS has seen -$1.88 M in net flows, compared with -$483.52 M for HBNK. PFLS has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of PFLS and HBNK compare?
PFLS has an expense ratio of 6.48%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about PFLS and HBNK
The ETF Market Canada is brought to you by Cboe in partnership with Trackinsight SA who is providing all the data, analysis and editorial content on this site. Unless explicitly stated as such, any information that you receive is not real-time.
All content on the ETF Market Canada is for your general information use only, Cboe is not responsible for any use of content by you outside this scope. In particular, the content does not constitute any form of advice, recommendation, representation, endorsement or arrangement by Cboe and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any specific investment or other decisions.
All content on the ETF Market Canada is for your general information use only, Cboe is not responsible for any use of content by you outside this scope. In particular, the content does not constitute any form of advice, recommendation, representation, endorsement or arrangement by Cboe and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any specific investment or other decisions.