VS
When evaluating costs, CCOM features a management fee (MER) of 0.52%, compared to 0.25% for ZEB. Performance-wise, CCOM has returned 11.64% year-to-date with +$126 M in net flows, whereas ZEB is at 23.88% with -$1,116 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
CCOM
ZEB
| AuM | $328.26 M | $5,536.30 M |
| Management Fees | 0.52% | 0.25% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.66% | 0.28% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.62% |
Historical performance and flows
As of June 11, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | CCOM | -5.68% | -0.65% | +11.64% | +17.98% | +17.62% |
ZEB | +7.80% | +20.31% | +23.88% | +66.43% | +145.04% | |
| Flows | CCOM | +$2 M | +$77 M | +$126 M | +$170 M | +$206 M |
ZEB | -$85 M | -$309 M | -$1,116 M | -$946 M | -$1,896 M |
CCOM vs ZEB exposure
Countries
CCOM
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEB
Canada
100.00%
Sectors
CCOM
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEB
Financials
100.00%
As of June 11, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
CCOM
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEB
TORONTO DOMINION
17.02%
CDN IMPERIAL BK
16.89%
NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA
16.73%
ROYAL BK CANADA
16.71%
BNS
16.37%
BANK OF MONTREAL
16.28%
Diversification
CCOM
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEB
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
100.00%
Characteristics
Compare
CCOM
ZEB
| Provider | CI | BMO |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Auspice Broad Commodity Excess Return Index - USD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Commodity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 7.54% | 2.44% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | September 22, 2022 | October 20, 2009 |
Frequently asked questions about CCOM and ZEB
Which ETF has performed better year to date: CCOM or ZEB?
As of June 11, 2026, CCOM has returned 11.64% year to date, while ZEB has returned 23.88%. ZEB is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: CCOM or ZEB?
As of June 11, 2026, CCOM manages $328.26 M in assets, while ZEB manages $5.54 B. ZEB is the larger fund by AUM.
How are CCOM and ZEB managed?
CCOM is passively managed by CI. It tracks the Auspice Broad Commodity Excess Return Index - USD benchmark. ZEB is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: CCOM or ZEB?
Year to date, CCOM has seen +$126.18 M in net flows, compared with -$1,115.72 M for ZEB. CCOM has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of CCOM and ZEB compare?
CCOM has an expense ratio of 0.66%, while ZEB has an expense ratio of 0.28%.
Recent articles about CCOM and ZEB
Natural Gas ETFs React to Price Surge
Natural gas prices hit two-year highs as cold weather, record LNG exports, and supply disruptions tighten market conditions.
Posted on 2/24/2025 by ETF Market Canada inOil & Gas
Bank Stocks: An Undervalued Gem?
Bank stocks are poised for growth amid declining inflation and rate cuts.
Posted on 7/29/2024 by ETF Market Canada inBanks
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.