VS
When evaluating costs, FCGS features a management fee (MER) of 0.85%, compared to 0.3% for XQLT. Performance-wise, FCGS has returned 9.35% year-to-date with +$95 M in net flows, whereas XQLT is at 17.27% with +$26 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
FCGS
XQLT
| AuM | $1,250.46 M | $267.04 M |
| Management Fees | 0.85% | 0.30% |
| Exp. ratio | 1.11% | 0.32% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.28% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCGS | +2.08% | -1.38% | +9.35% | +9.74% | +63.67% |
XQLT | +4.97% | +2.86% | +17.27% | +18.54% | +74.75% | |
| Flows | FCGS | -$11 M | -$2 M | +$95 M | +$85 M | +$1,010 M |
XQLT | +$0 M | +$2 M | +$26 M | +$22 M | +$112 M |
FCGS vs XQLT exposure
Countries
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
XQLT
USA
95.85%
Sectors
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
XQLT
Technology
48.71%
Finance
12.77%
Consumer Non-Cyclicals
9.56%
Healthcare
9.45%
Other
19.51%
As of October 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
XQLT
Microsoft Corp.
7.75%
Apple, Inc.
6.76%
NVIDIA Corp.
6.38%
Meta Platforms, Inc.
3.76%
Eli Lilly & Co.
3.66%
Lam Research Corp.
3.56%
The TJX Cos., Inc.
3.36%
Visa, Inc.
3.25%
Applied Materials, Inc.
2.78%
KLA Corp.
2.35%
Diversification
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
XQLT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 119 total
43.62%
Characteristics
Compare
FCGS
XQLT
| Provider | Fidelity | iShares |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality NTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | - | Other |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.58% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | May 25, 2023 | September 10, 2019 |
Frequently asked questions about FCGS and XQLT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCGS or XQLT?
As of October 16, 2026, FCGS has returned 9.35% year to date, while XQLT has returned 17.27%. XQLT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCGS or XQLT?
As of October 16, 2026, FCGS manages $1.25 B in assets, while XQLT manages $267.04 M. FCGS is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCGS and XQLT managed?
FCGS is actively managed by Fidelity. It does not track an index. XQLT is passively managed by iShares. It tracks the MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality NTR Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FCGS or XQLT?
Year to date, FCGS has seen +$94.87 M in net flows, compared with +$25.90 M for XQLT. FCGS has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCGS and XQLT compare?
FCGS has an expense ratio of 1.11%, while XQLT has an expense ratio of 0.32%.
Recent articles about FCGS and XQLT
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.