VS
When evaluating costs, FCGS features a management fee (MER) of 0.85%, compared to 0.4% for ZEQ. Performance-wise, FCGS has returned 9.35% year-to-date with +$95 M in net flows, whereas ZEQ is at 7.67% with -$49 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
ZEQ
| AuM | $1,250.46 M | $314.78 M |
| Management Fees | 0.85% | 0.40% |
| Exp. ratio | 1.11% | 0.45% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -3.02% |
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% |
ZEQ | +2.49% | +1.08% | +7.67% | +8.04% | +26.24% | |
| Flows | FCGS | -$11 M | -$2 M | +$95 M | +$85 M | +$1,010 M |
ZEQ | +$3 M | -$3 M | -$49 M | -$58 M | -$435 M |
FCGS vs ZEQ exposure
Countries
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEQ
Switzerland
25.42%
United Kingdom
25.18%
Germany
11.40%
France
11.06%
Netherlands
9.70%
Other
17.23%
Sectors
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEQ
Healthcare
21.12%
Industrials
21.04%
Consumer Non-Cyclicals
14.33%
Technology
13.50%
Finance
11.48%
Consumer Cyclicals
7.84%
Other
10.69%
As of October 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEQ
ASML Holding NV
5.52%
Roche Holding AG
4.79%
Novartis AG
4.76%
Nestlé SA
4.24%
AstraZeneca PLC
4.10%
SAP SE
3.62%
Novo Nordisk A/S
3.55%
ABB Ltd.
3.15%
Allianz SE
3.09%
Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc
3.06%
Diversification
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZEQ
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 122 total
39.86%
Characteristics
Compare
FCGS
ZEQ
| Provider | Fidelity | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | MSCI Europe Quality 100% Hedged to CAD Net Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | - | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 1.61% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | May 25, 2023 | February 10, 2014 |
Frequently asked questions about FCGS and ZEQ
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCGS or ZEQ?
As of October 16, 2026, FCGS has returned 9.35% year to date, while ZEQ has returned 7.67%. FCGS is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCGS or ZEQ?
As of October 16, 2026, FCGS manages $1.25 B in assets, while ZEQ manages $314.78 M. FCGS is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCGS and ZEQ managed?
FCGS is actively managed by Fidelity. It does not track an index. ZEQ is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the MSCI Europe Quality 100% Hedged to CAD Net Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FCGS or ZEQ?
Year to date, FCGS has seen +$94.87 M in net flows, compared with -$49.12 M for ZEQ. FCGS has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCGS and ZEQ compare?
FCGS has an expense ratio of 1.11%, while ZEQ has an expense ratio of 0.45%.
Recent articles about FCGS and ZEQ
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.