VS
When evaluating costs, FCUL features a management fee (MER) of 0.35%, compared to 0.06% for QUU. Performance-wise, FCUL has returned 13.42% year-to-date with +$855 M in net flows, whereas QUU is at 16.35% with +$2 B. 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
QUU
| AuM | $2,365.07 M | $7,363.25 M |
| Management Fees | 0.35% | 0.06% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.39% | 0.06% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.69% | -0.08% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 20, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCUL | +4.16% | +3.88% | +13.42% | +9.74% | +54.13% |
QUU | -0.58% | +3.79% | +16.35% | +15.65% | +95.24% | |
| Flows | FCUL | +$68 M | +$187 M | +$855 M | +$1,081 M | +$1,993 M |
QUU | +$318 M | +$943 M | +$1,570 M | +$1,886 M | +$2,584 M |
FCUL vs QUU exposure
Countries
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
QUU
USA
97.64%
Sectors
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
QUU
Technology
45.27%
Finance
13.23%
Healthcare
9.35%
Consumer Non-Cyclicals
8.71%
Industrials
7.65%
Other
15.80%
As of October 20, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
QUU
NVIDIA Corp.
7.73%
Apple, Inc.
6.83%
Microsoft Corp.
5.60%
Amazon.com, Inc.
3.76%
Alphabet, Inc.
2.99%
Broadcom Inc.
2.60%
Alphabet, Inc.
2.58%
Meta Platforms, Inc.
1.89%
Tesla, Inc.
1.70%
Micron Technology, Inc.
1.63%
Diversification
FCUL
Exposure data will be available soon
QUU
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 503 total
37.31%
Characteristics
Compare
FCUL
QUU
| Provider | Fidelity | Mackenzie Investments |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Fidelity Canada U.S. Low Volatility GTR Index - CAD | Solactive US Large Cap Index NTR - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 1.42% | 0.95% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | January 24, 2019 | January 24, 2018 |
Frequently asked questions about FCUL and QUU
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCUL or QUU?
As of October 20, 2026, FCUL has returned 13.42% year to date, while QUU has returned 16.35%. QUU is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCUL or QUU?
As of October 20, 2026, FCUL manages $2.37 B in assets, while QUU manages $7.36 B. QUU is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCUL and QUU managed?
FCUL is passively managed by Fidelity. It tracks the Fidelity Canada U.S. Low Volatility GTR Index - CAD benchmark. QUU is passively managed by Mackenzie Investments. It tracks the Solactive US Large Cap Index NTR - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FCUL or QUU?
Year to date, FCUL has seen +$854.76 M in net flows, compared with +$1,569.98 M for QUU. QUU has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCUL and QUU compare?
FCUL has an expense ratio of 0.39%, while QUU has an expense ratio of 0.06%.
Recent articles about FCUL and QUU
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.