VS
When evaluating costs, RPS features a management fee (MER) of 0.75%, compared to 0.5% for NPRF. Performance-wise, RPS has returned 5.95% year-to-date with -$6 M in net flows, whereas NPRF is at 1.48% with +$7 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
RPS
NPRF
| AuM | $38.44 M | $166.54 M |
| Management Fees | 0.75% | 0.50% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.93% | 0.49% |
| Tracking Difference | - | - |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 19, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | RPS | -0.17% | -0.06% | +5.95% | +9.39% | +65.63% |
NPRF | -0.58% | -1.81% | +1.48% | +3.33% | +45.48% | |
| Flows | RPS | +$0 M | -$0 M | -$6 M | -$9 M | -$8 M |
NPRF | +$1 M | +$2 M | +$7 M | +$7 M | -$8 M |
RPS vs NPRF exposure
Countries
RPS
Exposure data will be available soon
NPRF
Exposure data will be available soon
Sectors
RPS
Exposure data will be available soon
NPRF
Exposure data will be available soon
As of October 19, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
RPS
Exposure data will be available soon
NPRF
Exposure data will be available soon
Diversification
RPS
Exposure data will be available soon
NPRF
Exposure data will be available soon
Characteristics
Compare
RPS
NPRF
| Provider | Purpose Investments | National Bank Investments |
| Management | Actively managed | Actively managed |
| Benchmark | - | - |
| Replication Method | - | - |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 4.04% | 0.00% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | December 22, 2016 | February 8, 2019 |
Frequently asked questions about RPS and NPRF
Which ETF has performed better year to date: RPS or NPRF?
As of October 19, 2026, RPS has returned 5.95% year to date, while NPRF has returned 1.48%. RPS is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: RPS or NPRF?
As of October 19, 2026, RPS manages $38.44 M in assets, while NPRF manages $166.54 M. NPRF is the larger fund by AUM.
How are RPS and NPRF managed?
RPS is actively managed by Purpose Investments. It does not track an index. NPRF is actively managed by National Bank Investments. It does not track an index.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: RPS or NPRF?
Year to date, RPS has seen -$6.40 M in net flows, compared with +$6.70 M for NPRF. NPRF has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of RPS and NPRF compare?
RPS has an expense ratio of 0.93%, while NPRF has an expense ratio of 0.49%.
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.