HFEV vs TOKE

HFEV vs TOKE

Which is better, HFEV or TOKE?

TOKE costs less.

TOKE has a lower expense ratio.

Lower Fees: TOKE

MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.

Side-by-Side Comparison

MetricHFEVTOKE
Expense Ratio0.65%0.44%Best
AUM-$14M
Dividend Yield-1.06%
Holdings-24
YTD Price Return--15.35%
1Y Price Return-+21.58%
3Y Price Return (annualized)--5.68%
5Y Price Return (annualized)--22.46%
Volatility (annualized)-35.8%
Max Drawdown--85.5%
Fund FamilyNew Age AlphaCambria Investment Management
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleMid Cap GrowthMid Cap Growth
InceptionNov 22, 2019Jul 25, 2019

Not shown on this pair: $10,000 over the window, Top 10 Weight.

Returns are price returns and exclude distributions, because our data feed carries no adjusted close for HFEV. We have no price series for HFEV, so there is nothing to compare it against.

Compare HFEV against instead:HFEV vs SPYHFEV vs QQQHFEV vs VOOHFEV vs VTITOKE against:TOKE vs VXUS

HFEV vs TOKE Performance

New Age Alpha Europe Ex-UK Low Vol ETF (HFEV) is an ETF from New Age Alpha and Cambria Cannabis ETF (TOKE) is an ETF from Cambria Investment Management.

Fees and Cost Over Time

HFEV charges 0.65% per year while TOKE charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $44 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of HFEV and TOKE you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

HFEVTOKE

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, HFEV or TOKE?

HFEV has an expense ratio of 0.65% while TOKE charges 0.44%. TOKE is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Is TOKE better than HFEV?

TOKE has a lower expense ratio. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.