VS
When evaluating costs, EACC features a management fee (MER) of 0.49%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, EACC has returned 11.96% year-to-date with +$47 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 13.92% with -$96 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
EACC
ZUT
| AuM | $108.00 M | $820.93 M |
| Management Fees | 0.49% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.63% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.80% |
Historical performance and flows
As of September 4, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | EACC | -1.32% | +3.50% | +11.96% | +18.48% | - |
ZUT | -6.00% | -4.94% | +13.92% | +20.18% | +49.46% | |
| Flows | EACC | +$3 M | +$12 M | +$47 M | +$65 M | - |
ZUT | +$23 M | -$27 M | -$96 M | -$89 M | +$217 M |
EACC vs ZUT exposure
Countries
EACC
Other
100.00%
ZUT
Canada
84.41%
Bermuda
15.59%
Sectors
EACC
Other
100.00%
ZUT
Utilities
83.73%
Energy
8.32%
Industrials
7.95%
As of September 4, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
EACC
CA37962B1031
100.44%
ZUT
Boralex, Inc.
9.47%
ATCO Ltd.
8.45%
AltaGas Ltd.
8.32%
Canadian Utilities Ltd.
8.09%
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP
7.95%
Capital Power Corp.
7.68%
Brookfield Renewable Partners LP
7.64%
Emera, Inc.
7.35%
TransAlta Corp.
7.18%
Northland Power, Inc.
7.08%
Diversification
EACC
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 1 total
100.44%
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
79.21%
Characteristics
Compare
EACC
ZUT
| Provider | Global X | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 7.60% | 2.90% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | May 21, 2024 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about EACC and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: EACC or ZUT?
As of September 4, 2026, EACC has returned 11.96% year to date, while ZUT has returned 13.92%. ZUT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: EACC or ZUT?
As of September 4, 2026, EACC manages $108.00 M in assets, while ZUT manages $820.93 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are EACC and ZUT managed?
EACC is actively managed by Global X. It does not track an index. ZUT is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: EACC or ZUT?
Year to date, EACC has seen +$47.43 M in net flows, compared with -$96.30 M for ZUT. EACC has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of EACC and ZUT compare?
EACC has an expense ratio of 0.63%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Which ETF is more diversified: EACC or ZUT?
EACC holds 1 securities, while ZUT holds 13. On holdings count, ZUT is the more diversified portfolio.
Recent articles about EACC and ZUT
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.