VS
When evaluating costs, FCGC features a management fee (MER) of 0.85%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, FCGC has returned 16.4% year-to-date with +$11 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 29.74% with -$510 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
FCGC
HBNK
| AuM | $115.40 M | $721.86 M |
| Management Fees | 0.85% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 1.10% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.42% |
Historical performance and flows
As of August 27, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCGC | +2.77% | +6.27% | +16.40% | +23.46% | +59.65% |
HBNK | -2.66% | +7.69% | +29.74% | +54.66% | +156.79% | |
| Flows | FCGC | +$1 M | +$2 M | +$11 M | +$12 M | +$41 M |
HBNK | -$18 M | -$79 M | -$510 M | -$867 M | -$76 M |
FCGC vs HBNK exposure
Countries
FCGC
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
99.59%
Sectors
FCGC
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Finance
99.59%
As of August 27, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCGC
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
FCGC
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.59%
Characteristics
Compare
FCGC
HBNK
| Provider | Fidelity | 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 | 0.00% | 2.62% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | May 25, 2023 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about FCGC and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCGC or HBNK?
As of August 27, 2026, FCGC has returned 16.40% year to date, while HBNK has returned 29.74%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCGC or HBNK?
As of August 27, 2026, FCGC manages $115.40 M in assets, while HBNK manages $721.86 M. HBNK is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCGC and HBNK managed?
FCGC is actively managed by Fidelity. 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: FCGC or HBNK?
Year to date, FCGC has seen +$11.33 M in net flows, compared with -$510.20 M for HBNK. FCGC has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCGC and HBNK compare?
FCGC has an expense ratio of 1.10%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about FCGC 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.