CASH vs CBIL vs PSA: The Best Cash ETF Depends on What You Mean by Safe

Quick answer

For a Canadian investor who wants a brokerage-account cash alternative and cares first about the underlying credit structure, CBIL is the cleanest default of these three. It holds Government of Canada Treasury bills generally maturing in less than three months; on July 27, 2026, Global X reported a 0.12-year weighted duration, A-1+ average credit quality, and a 2.25% weighted yield to maturity.^[2] That is a more direct sovereign exposure than a fund built mainly from negotiated bank deposits.

PSA has the strongest current yield headline. Purpose reported a 2.18% net yield on July 27, versus annualized distribution yields of 1.93% for CBIL and 1.74% for CASH.^[1][2][3] But those labels are not identical calculations. PSA's net yield is a current portfolio measure, while Global X annualizes the most recent regular distribution against NAV. Treating that spread as a guaranteed advantage would be false precision.

CASH remains relevant because it is large, inexpensive, and heavily traded. Global X reported $6.54 billion in net assets and 1.52 million units of 12-month average daily trading volume, both higher than the corresponding verified figures for CBIL.^[1] Its trade-off is that the portfolio is a collection of bank cash accounts rather than direct federal Treasury bills.

Head-to-head

The same-date one-year returns are useful because they use a common June 30 endpoint: 2.20% for CASH, 2.31% for CBIL, and 2.32% for PSA.^[1][2][3] The difference between first and last was only 0.12 percentage points. On $10,000, that historical gap was about $12 before tax and trading costs. A commission, a wide entry-and-exit spread, or one poorly timed market order can erase that much on a short holding.

What the structures change

CASH held 49.51% in a National Bank cash account, 28.04% in a Scotiabank cash account, 14.78% in a CIBC cash account, and smaller balances in additional Scotia and CIBC Mellon accounts on July 27.^[1] Diversifying across accounts helps, but the economic exposure is still negotiated deposits with a concentrated bank group. The fund's gross yield was 2.16% effective July 8, while its MER was 0.11% for 2025.^[1]

CBIL's holdings were federal Treasury bills spanning late July through November 2026.^[2] The Bank of Canada's July 28 auction produced a 2.29% average yield on three-month bills, while the July 22 secondary-market three-month yield was 2.26%.^[5] Those figures explain why CBIL's portfolio yield sits near the policy rate without requiring a bank-deposit spread. Its small duration does not eliminate price movement, but it sharply limits conventional interest-rate sensitivity compared with a longer bond fund.

Purpose says PSA mixes Schedule I bank deposits with short Bank of Canada Treasury bills, calculates interest daily, pays monthly, and settles T+1.^[3] It reported a 2.35% gross yield, 2.18% net yield, $4.2 billion of assets, and a 0.17% MER on the relevant dates.^[3] The reviewed portfolio page showed four position weights plus a total but did not render the holding names, so this review cannot independently compare PSA's current bank concentration with CASH's.^[4]

The after-tax scorecard

The table below is an illustration, not a tax forecast. It applies assumed marginal tax rates to the current quoted yield measures—1.74% for CASH, 1.93% for CBIL, and 2.18% for PSA—and assumes the return is ordinary income. Actual T3 characterization can differ and will only be final after the tax year. CRA says interest and other investment income must be reported in a non-registered account.^[8]

CRA states that TFSA interest, dividends, and capital gains are generally tax-free.^[9] An FHSA permits eligible first-time home buyers to save for a qualifying home tax-free, subject to its rules.^[11] RRSP income is usually exempt while it stays in the plan, but withdrawals are generally taxable.^[10] Account room has an opportunity cost, so the tax shelter alone does not decide whether a low-volatility holding belongs there.

What the numbers miss

None of these ETFs is a CDIC-insured deposit. CDIC explicitly excludes exchange-traded funds, and each issuer gives the same warning.^[1][2][3][7] CBIL's underlying federal bills still have a different credit structure from bank deposits, but owning CBIL units is not the same legal product as holding an insured bank account or GIC.

Yield reset risk matters too. The Bank of Canada held its policy rate at 2.25% on July 15 and scheduled its next decision for September 2.^[6] A future rate cut would normally flow through to new Treasury bills and negotiated deposit rates, although not at exactly the same speed. Today's ranking can therefore change without any fund changing its mandate.

Finally, ETF liquidity is not a promise of an exact $50 exit. Prices can trade above or below NAV, and commissions or spreads matter. CASH and CBIL both closed at NAV on July 27, but that is a snapshot, not a guarantee.^[1][2] A limit order during normal market hours is a more controlled implementation than a market order near the open or close.

Who each option fits

CBIL fits the structure-first investor. It is the clearest match for someone who wants direct short federal-bill exposure, transparent maturities, low duration, and a 0.11% MER.^[2] Its quoted distribution yield was not the highest, so it is not automatically the best income maximizer.

PSA fits the yield-first comparison shopper. It had the highest current quoted net yield and narrowly led the one-year return comparison.^[3] The higher 0.17% MER did not prevent that result, but the yield can reset and the rendered holdings disclosure was less useful for this review.

CASH fits the execution-first investor. It combines a 0.11% MER with the largest assets and strongest verified average-volume figure.^[1] That can be useful for larger or more frequent trades. The cost is bank-account concentration and the lowest current distribution-yield headline of the three.

Bottom line

CBIL earns the highest structural score, not a universal recommendation. PSA leads on the current issuer-quoted net yield, and CASH leads on verified trading depth. For a very short holding, compare the live spread and commission before chasing a yield difference measured in tenths of a percentage point. For money that must be insured or available at par on demand, compare these ETFs with an eligible bank deposit or cashable GIC instead of assuming the word cash makes them equivalent.^[7]