VS
When evaluating costs, FCQH features a management fee (MER) of 0.38%, compared to 0.05% for SITU. Performance-wise, FCQH has returned 9.16% year-to-date with -$5 M in net flows, whereas SITU is at 15.78% with +$887 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
FCQH
SITU
| AuM | $70.26 M | $4,960.03 M |
| Management Fees | 0.38% | 0.05% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.42% | 0.08% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.51% | -0.07% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 29, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCQH | +1.65% | +4.32% | +9.16% | +7.94% | +62.46% |
SITU | -0.96% | +4.98% | +15.78% | +13.40% | +94.65% | |
| Flows | FCQH | +$0 M | -$2 M | -$5 M | -$6 M | -$3 M |
SITU | +$259 M | +$336 M | +$887 M | +$1,231 M | +$2,986 M |
FCQH vs SITU exposure
Countries
FCQH
Exposure data will be available soon
SITU
USA
97.39%
Sectors
FCQH
Exposure data will be available soon
SITU
Technology
45.22%
Finance
13.33%
Healthcare
9.27%
Consumer Non-Cyclicals
8.82%
Industrials
7.48%
Other
15.88%
As of October 29, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCQH
Exposure data will be available soon
SITU
NVIDIA Corp.
7.74%
Apple, Inc.
6.82%
Microsoft Corp.
5.60%
Amazon.com, Inc.
3.76%
Alphabet, Inc.
2.98%
Broadcom Inc.
2.60%
Alphabet, Inc.
2.57%
Meta Platforms, Inc.
1.89%
Tesla, Inc.
1.69%
Micron Technology, Inc.
1.63%
Diversification
FCQH
Exposure data will be available soon
SITU
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 505 total
37.28%
Characteristics
Compare
FCQH
SITU
| Provider | Fidelity | Scotia Bank |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Fidelity US High Quality Currency Neutral GTR Index - CAD | Solactive GBS United States 500 CAD Net Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.46% | 0.99% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | January 24, 2019 | March 11, 2020 |
Frequently asked questions about FCQH and SITU
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCQH or SITU?
As of October 29, 2026, FCQH has returned 9.16% year to date, while SITU has returned 15.78%. SITU is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCQH or SITU?
As of October 29, 2026, FCQH manages $70.26 M in assets, while SITU manages $4.96 B. SITU is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCQH and SITU managed?
FCQH is passively managed by Fidelity. It tracks the Fidelity US High Quality Currency Neutral GTR Index - CAD benchmark. SITU is passively managed by Scotia Bank. It tracks the Solactive GBS United States 500 CAD Net Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FCQH or SITU?
Year to date, FCQH has seen -$4.55 M in net flows, compared with +$886.68 M for SITU. SITU has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCQH and SITU compare?
FCQH has an expense ratio of 0.42%, while SITU has an expense ratio of 0.08%.
Recent articles about FCQH and SITU
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.