VS
When evaluating costs, FCUQ features a management fee (MER) of 0.35%, compared to 0.05% for SITU. Performance-wise, FCUQ has returned 14.98% year-to-date with +$731 M in net flows, whereas SITU is at 18.03% with +$664 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
FCUQ
SITU
| AuM | $2,843.25 M | $4,831.20 M |
| Management Fees | 0.35% | 0.05% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.39% | 0.08% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.61% | -0.07% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 15, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FCUQ | +4.01% | +5.04% | +14.98% | +14.06% | +68.47% |
SITU | +4.22% | +3.56% | +18.03% | +18.20% | +91.63% | |
| Flows | FCUQ | +$52 M | +$160 M | +$731 M | +$975 M | +$1,985 M |
SITU | +$35 M | +$142 M | +$664 M | +$1,047 M | +$2,760 M |
FCUQ vs SITU exposure
Countries
FCUQ
Exposure data will be available soon
SITU
USA
97.39%
Sectors
FCUQ
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 15, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FCUQ
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
FCUQ
Exposure data will be available soon
SITU
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 505 total
37.28%
Characteristics
Compare
FCUQ
SITU
| Provider | Fidelity | Scotia Bank |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Fidelity US High Quality 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 | 0.70% | 0.98% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | January 24, 2019 | March 11, 2020 |
Frequently asked questions about FCUQ and SITU
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FCUQ or SITU?
As of October 15, 2026, FCUQ has returned 14.98% year to date, while SITU has returned 18.03%. SITU is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FCUQ or SITU?
As of October 15, 2026, FCUQ manages $2.84 B in assets, while SITU manages $4.83 B. SITU is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FCUQ and SITU managed?
FCUQ is passively managed by Fidelity. It tracks the Fidelity US High Quality 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: FCUQ or SITU?
Year to date, FCUQ has seen +$731.36 M in net flows, compared with +$663.61 M for SITU. FCUQ has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FCUQ and SITU compare?
FCUQ has an expense ratio of 0.39%, while SITU has an expense ratio of 0.08%.
Recent articles about FCUQ 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.