CGXF
CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF

Full CGXF fund page
VS
XEQT
iShares Core Equity ETF

Full XEQT fund page

CI Gold+ Giants Covered Call ETF (CGXF) and iShares Core Equity ETF (XEQT) offer distinct profiles for Canadian ETF investors. A direct comparison shows that CGXF focuses its top 3 sector exposures on Materials, while XEQT leans towards Information Technology, Financials, and Industrials. When evaluating costs, CGXF features a management fee (MER) of 0.65%, compared to 0.18% for XEQT. Performance-wise, CGXF has returned 7.51% year-to-date with +$76 M in net flows, whereas XEQT is at 12.34% with +$5 B. Use the comparison tool below to benchmark these funds across top 10 holdings, yield, sector weights and historical returns.

NAV Performance and Flows

-20.0-15.0-10.0-5.00.0%May 12May 20May 27Jun 3Jun 10

Key Data

Historical performance and flows

As of June 12, 2026
1M3MYTD1Y3Y
Perf.
CGXF
-15.71%-18.87%-7.51%+36.54%+115.50%
XEQT
+2.94%+12.10%+12.34%+29.46%+81.40%
Flows
CGXF
+$19 M+$76 M+$76 M+$42 M+$15 M
XEQT
+$1,205 M+$2,593 M+$5,053 M+$8,146 M+$13,098 M

CGXF vs XEQT exposure

Countries

CGXF
Canada
52.92%
USA
33.34%
United Kingdom
13.75%
XEQT
USA
42.85%
Canada
25.60%
Other
31.55%

Sectors

CGXF
Materials
79.66%
Other
20.34%
XEQT
Information Technology
20.56%
Financials
18.58%
Industrials
10.76%
Consumer Discretionary
7.76%
Other
7.36%
Energy
7.32%
Other
27.65%
As of June 12, 2026

Top 10 Holdings

CGXF
NEWMONT CORP
7.16%
KINROSS GOLD
7.15%
GB00BRXH2664
6.98%
PAN AMERICAN
6.94%
ENDEAVOUR MINING
6.77%
US38059T1060
6.76%
WHEATON PRECIOUS METALS CORP
6.73%
HECLA MINING
6.61%
CA06849F1080
6.61%
ROYAL GOLD
6.59%
XEQT
NVIDIA
3.07%
APPLE
2.52%
MICROSOFT-T
1.92%
ROYAL BK CANADA
1.81%
AMAZON.COM INC
1.64%
ALPHABET INC-CL
1.42%
TORONTO DOMINION
1.30%
BROADCOM LIMITED
1.25%
ALPHABET INC-CL
1.13%
SHOPIFY SUBORDINATE VOTING
1.07%

Diversification

CGXF
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 15 total
68.30%
XEQT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 8,365 total
17.13%

Characteristics

Compare
CGXF
XEQT
ProviderCIiShares
ManagementActively managedActively managed
Benchmark--
Replication Method
Asset ClassEquityEquity
Dividend PolicyDistributingDistributing
Trailing 12m distribution yield13.32%1.49%
Meets ESG criteriaNoNo
Inception DateJune 1, 2011August 7, 2019

Frequently asked questions about CGXF and XEQT

Which ETF has performed better year to date: CGXF or XEQT?
As of June 12, 2026, CGXF has returned -7.51% year to date, while XEQT has returned 12.34%. XEQT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: CGXF or XEQT?
As of June 12, 2026, CGXF manages $232.37 M in assets, while XEQT manages $19.05 B. XEQT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are CGXF and XEQT managed?
CGXF is actively managed by CI. It does not track an index. XEQT is actively managed by iShares. It does not track an index.
What sectors do CGXF and XEQT emphasize?
CGXF is most exposed to Materials. XEQT is most exposed to Information Technology, Financials, and Industrials.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: CGXF or XEQT?
Year to date, CGXF has seen +$75.87 M in net flows, compared with +$5,053.19 M for XEQT. XEQT has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of CGXF and XEQT compare?
CGXF has an expense ratio of 0.72%, while XEQT has an expense ratio of 0.20%.
What are the top holdings of CGXF and XEQT?
CGXF's largest holdings include NEWMONT CORP and KINROSS GOLD. XEQT's top holdings include NVIDIA and ALPHABET INC-CL.
Which ETF is more diversified: CGXF or XEQT?
CGXF holds 13 securities, while XEQT holds 7454. On holdings count, XEQT is the more diversified portfolio.

Recent articles about CGXF and XEQT

CboeTrackinsight
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.
diamonds