VS
When evaluating costs, FCCV features a management fee (MER) of 0.35%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, FCCV has returned 18.22% year-to-date with +$414 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 29.88% with -$482 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
FCCV
HBNK
| AuM | $1,349.86 M | $748.64 M |
| Management Fees | 0.35% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.39% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.58% | -0.35% |
Historical performance and flows
As of September 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCCV | -2.60% | +0.88% | +18.22% | +34.43% | +89.32% |
HBNK | -4.69% | +2.40% | +29.88% | +48.43% | +153.45% | |
| Flows | FCCV | +$49 M | +$146 M | +$414 M | +$555 M | +$907 M |
HBNK | +$34 M | -$65 M | -$482 M | -$592 M | -$92 M |
FCCV vs HBNK exposure
Countries
FCCV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
99.59%
Sectors
FCCV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Finance
99.59%
As of September 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCCV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Royal Bank of Canada
17.26%
Bank of Montreal
17.04%
The Toronto-Dominion Bank
16.90%
The Bank of Nova Scotia
16.41%
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
16.05%
National Bank of Canada
15.93%
Diversification
FCCV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.59%
Characteristics
Compare
FCCV
HBNK
| Provider | Fidelity | Global X |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Fidelity Canada Canadian Value GTR Index - CAD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 1.52% | 2.65% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | June 10, 2020 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about FCCV and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCCV or HBNK?
As of September 16, 2026, FCCV has returned 18.22% year to date, while HBNK has returned 29.88%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCCV or HBNK?
As of September 16, 2026, FCCV manages $1.35 B in assets, while HBNK manages $748.64 M. FCCV is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCCV and HBNK managed?
FCCV is passively managed by Fidelity. It tracks the Fidelity Canada Canadian Value GTR Index - CAD benchmark. 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: FCCV or HBNK?
Year to date, FCCV has seen +$413.68 M in net flows, compared with -$482.41 M for HBNK. FCCV has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCCV and HBNK compare?
FCCV has an expense ratio of 0.39%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about FCCV and HBNK
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.