VS
When evaluating costs, EQY features a management fee (MER) of 0.13%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, EQY has returned 10.39% year-to-date with +$1 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 21.73% with -$415 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
EQY
HBNK
| AuM | $4.34 M | $768.47 M |
| Management Fees | 0.13% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.22% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.41% |
Historical performance and flows
As of June 8, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | EQY | +1.57% | +9.51% | +10.39% | +27.93% | - |
HBNK | +5.68% | +18.79% | +21.73% | +63.01% | - | |
| Flows | EQY | +$0 M | +$0 M | +$1 M | +$3 M | - |
HBNK | +$32 M | -$201 M | -$415 M | -$667 M | - |
EQY vs HBNK exposure
Countries
EQY
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
99.93%
Sectors
EQY
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Financials
99.93%
As of June 8, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
EQY
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
CDN IMPERIAL BK
17.03%
TORONTO DOMINION
16.96%
NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA
16.65%
ROYAL BK CANADA
16.56%
BANK OF MONTREAL
16.46%
BNS
16.27%
Diversification
EQY
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.93%
Characteristics
Compare
EQY
HBNK
| Provider | Franklin Templeton | Global X |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 1.79% | 2.75% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | June 5, 2024 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about EQY and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: EQY or HBNK?
As of June 8, 2026, EQY has returned 10.39% year to date, while HBNK has returned 21.73%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: EQY or HBNK?
As of June 8, 2026, EQY manages $4.34 M in assets, while HBNK manages $768.47 M. HBNK is the larger fund by AUM.
How are EQY and HBNK managed?
EQY is actively managed by Franklin Templeton. 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: EQY or HBNK?
Year to date, EQY has seen +$1.34 M in net flows, compared with -$414.79 M for HBNK. EQY has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of EQY and HBNK compare?
EQY has an expense ratio of 0.22%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about EQY and HBNK
Franklin Multi-Asset ETF Portfolios: Diversified Investing for Every Risk Tolerance
Rob Marrocco, Global Head of ETFs for Cboe Global Markets chats with Mike Greenberg, SVP and Global Head of Americas Portfolio Management for Franklin Templeton about the firm’s Multi-Asset ETF Portfolios, highlighting its variety and competitive edge.
Posted on 8/6/2024 by ETF Market Canada inETF Ecosystem
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.