VS
When evaluating costs, FCGS features a management fee (MER) of 0.85%, compared to 0.45% for ZGQ. Performance-wise, FCGS has returned 9.35% year-to-date with +$95 M in net flows, whereas ZGQ is at 16.69% with +$64 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
ZGQ
| AuM | $1,250.46 M | $1,302.70 M |
| Management Fees | 0.85% | 0.45% |
| Exp. ratio | 1.11% | 0.50% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.41% |
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% |
ZGQ | +3.14% | +1.73% | +16.69% | +18.17% | +78.70% | |
| Flows | FCGS | -$11 M | -$2 M | +$95 M | +$85 M | +$1,010 M |
ZGQ | +$5 M | +$14 M | +$64 M | +$60 M | +$492 M |
FCGS vs ZGQ exposure
Countries
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZGQ
USA
68.96%
Taiwan
7.19%
Other
23.85%
Sectors
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZGQ
Technology
51.61%
Healthcare
13.29%
Industrials
9.57%
Consumer Non-Cyclicals
8.50%
Finance
8.05%
Other
8.98%
As of October 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZGQ
Microsoft Corp.
5.85%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
5.19%
Apple, Inc.
5.09%
NVIDIA Corp.
4.69%
Broadcom Inc.
4.27%
Meta Platforms, Inc.
4.03%
Eli Lilly & Co.
2.90%
ASML Holding NV
2.48%
Alphabet, Inc.
2.37%
Visa, Inc.
2.30%
Diversification
FCGS
Exposure data will be available soon
ZGQ
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 498 total
39.16%
Characteristics
Compare
FCGS
ZGQ
| Provider | Fidelity | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | MSCI ACWI Quality Net Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | - | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.48% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | May 25, 2023 | November 5, 2014 |
Frequently asked questions about FCGS and ZGQ
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCGS or ZGQ?
As of October 16, 2026, FCGS has returned 9.35% year to date, while ZGQ has returned 16.69%. ZGQ is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCGS or ZGQ?
As of October 16, 2026, FCGS manages $1.25 B in assets, while ZGQ manages $1.30 B. ZGQ is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCGS and ZGQ managed?
FCGS is actively managed by Fidelity. It does not track an index. ZGQ is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the MSCI ACWI Quality Net Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FCGS or ZGQ?
Year to date, FCGS has seen +$94.87 M in net flows, compared with +$63.75 M for ZGQ. FCGS has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCGS and ZGQ compare?
FCGS has an expense ratio of 1.11%, while ZGQ has an expense ratio of 0.50%.
Recent articles about FCGS and ZGQ
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.