VS
When evaluating costs, FCUL features a management fee (MER) of 0.35%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, FCUL has returned 11.51% year-to-date with +$706 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 33.47% with -$515 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
FCUL
HBNK
| AuM | $2,184.86 M | $737.96 M |
| Management Fees | 0.35% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.39% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.72% | -0.42% |
Historical performance and flows
As of August 7, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCUL | +0.04% | +8.56% | +11.51% | +12.39% | +49.69% |
HBNK | +0.12% | +15.98% | +33.47% | +68.29% | +155.80% | |
| Flows | FCUL | +$73 M | +$199 M | +$706 M | +$1,132 M | +$1,852 M |
HBNK | -$52 M | -$70 M | -$515 M | -$857 M | -$67 M |
FCUL vs HBNK exposure
Countries
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
99.94%
Sectors
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Finance
99.94%
As of August 7, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
The Toronto-Dominion Bank
17.41%
Royal Bank of Canada
17.34%
Bank of Montreal
17.04%
The Bank of Nova Scotia
16.51%
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
15.85%
National Bank of Canada
15.79%
Diversification
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.94%
Characteristics
Compare
FCUL
HBNK
| Provider | Fidelity | Global X |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Fidelity Canada U.S. Low Volatility GTR Index - CAD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 1.21% | 2.55% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | January 24, 2019 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about FCUL and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCUL or HBNK?
As of August 7, 2026, FCUL has returned 11.51% year to date, while HBNK has returned 33.47%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCUL or HBNK?
As of August 7, 2026, FCUL manages $2.18 B in assets, while HBNK manages $737.96 M. FCUL is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCUL and HBNK managed?
FCUL is passively managed by Fidelity. It tracks the Fidelity Canada U.S. Low Volatility GTR Index - CAD benchmark. HBNK is passively managed by Global X. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FCUL or HBNK?
Year to date, FCUL has seen +$705.91 M in net flows, compared with -$514.70 M for HBNK. FCUL has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCUL and HBNK compare?
FCUL has an expense ratio of 0.39%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about FCUL and HBNK
Bank Stocks: An Undervalued Gem?
Bank stocks are poised for growth amid declining inflation and rate cuts.
Posted on 7/29/2024 by ETF Market Canada inBanks
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.