VS
When evaluating costs, CGRW features a management fee (MER) of 0.17%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, CGRW has returned 10.23% year-to-date with +$2 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 35.86% with -$461 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
CGRW
HBNK
| AuM | $3.51 M | $807.27 M |
| Management Fees | 0.17% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.17% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.44% |
Historical performance and flows
As of July 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | CGRW | -0.27% | +5.23% | +10.23% | - | - |
HBNK | +6.04% | +19.91% | +35.86% | +71.53% | +159.08% | |
| Flows | CGRW | +$1 M | +$1 M | +$2 M | - | - |
HBNK | -$44 M | +$39 M | -$461 M | -$767 M | +$3 M |
CGRW vs HBNK exposure
Countries
CGRW
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
100.00%
Sectors
CGRW
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Finance
100.00%
As of July 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
CGRW
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
The Toronto-Dominion Bank
17.52%
Royal Bank of Canada
17.09%
Bank of Montreal
16.85%
The Bank of Nova Scotia
16.38%
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
16.27%
National Bank of Canada
15.89%
Diversification
CGRW
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
100.00%
Characteristics
Compare
CGRW
HBNK
| Provider | CIBC | Global X |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity, Fixed Income | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | - | 2.48% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | November 6, 2025 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about CGRW and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: CGRW or HBNK?
As of July 16, 2026, CGRW has returned 10.23% year to date, while HBNK has returned 35.86%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: CGRW or HBNK?
As of July 16, 2026, CGRW manages $3.51 M in assets, while HBNK manages $807.27 M. HBNK is the larger fund by AUM.
How are CGRW and HBNK managed?
CGRW is actively managed by CIBC. 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: CGRW or HBNK?
Year to date, CGRW has seen +$2.12 M in net flows, compared with -$461.23 M for HBNK. CGRW has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of CGRW and HBNK compare?
CGRW has an expense ratio of 0.17%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about CGRW and HBNK
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.