VS
When evaluating costs, FCGC features a management fee (MER) of 0.85%, compared to 0.6% for RNAV. Performance-wise, FCGC has returned 12.29% year-to-date with +$13 M in net flows, whereas RNAV is at 11.41% with +$39 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
RNAV
| AuM | $113.25 M | $107.13 M |
| Management Fees | 0.85% | 0.60% |
| Exp. ratio | 1.10% | 0.80% |
| Tracking Difference | - | - |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 7, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCGC | -2.13% | +0.30% | +12.29% | +17.28% | +57.49% |
RNAV | -2.01% | -0.15% | +11.41% | +14.33% | +74.85% | |
| Flows | FCGC | +$2 M | +$3 M | +$13 M | +$14 M | +$39 M |
RNAV | +$5 M | +$13 M | +$39 M | +$17 M | +$80 M |
FCGC vs RNAV exposure
Countries
FCGC
Exposure data will be available soon
RNAV
Exposure data will be available soon
Sectors
FCGC
Exposure data will be available soon
RNAV
Exposure data will be available soon
As of October 7, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCGC
Exposure data will be available soon
RNAV
Exposure data will be available soon
Diversification
FCGC
Exposure data will be available soon
RNAV
Exposure data will be available soon
Characteristics
Compare
FCGC
RNAV
| Provider | Fidelity | RBC Global Asset Management |
| Management | Actively managed | Actively managed |
| Benchmark | - | - |
| Replication Method | - | - |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 1.19% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | May 25, 2023 | March 8, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about FCGC and RNAV
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCGC or RNAV?
As of October 7, 2026, FCGC has returned 12.29% year to date, while RNAV has returned 11.41%. FCGC is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCGC or RNAV?
As of October 7, 2026, FCGC manages $113.25 M in assets, while RNAV manages $107.13 M. FCGC is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCGC and RNAV managed?
FCGC is actively managed by Fidelity. It does not track an index. RNAV is actively managed by RBC Global Asset Management. It does not track an index.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FCGC or RNAV?
Year to date, FCGC has seen +$13.27 M in net flows, compared with +$38.51 M for RNAV. RNAV has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCGC and RNAV compare?
FCGC has an expense ratio of 1.10%, while RNAV has an expense ratio of 0.80%.
Recent articles about FCGC and RNAV
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.