VS
When evaluating costs, FORU features a management fee (MER) of 1.08%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, FORU has returned 7.72% year-to-date with +$1 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 22.01% with -$126 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
FORU
ZUT
| AuM | $4.54 M | $852.91 M |
| Management Fees | 1.08% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.79% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | -1.29% | -0.85% |
Historical performance and flows
As of July 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | FORU | -3.04% | +2.99% | +7.72% | +19.12% | - |
ZUT | +1.71% | +5.71% | +22.01% | +27.22% | +54.59% | |
| Flows | FORU | +$0 M | +$1 M | +$1 M | +$1 M | - |
ZUT | -$60 M | -$66 M | -$126 M | -$42 M | +$188 M |
FORU vs ZUT exposure
Countries
FORU
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
83.77%
Bermuda
16.23%
Sectors
FORU
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
84.34%
Energy
8.20%
Industrials
7.46%
As of July 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
FORU
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Boralex, Inc.
9.57%
Brookfield Renewable Partners LP
8.77%
AltaGas Ltd.
8.20%
Capital Power Corp.
8.05%
TransAlta Corp.
7.83%
Northland Power, Inc.
7.73%
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP
7.46%
Canadian Utilities Ltd.
7.33%
ATCO Ltd.
7.25%
Emera, Inc.
7.16%
Diversification
FORU
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
79.35%
Characteristics
Compare
FORU
ZUT
| Provider | LongPoint Asset Management | BMO |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | ForAll Core & More US Equity NTR Index - CAD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 2.72% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | November 11, 2024 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about FORU and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: FORU or ZUT?
As of July 16, 2026, FORU has returned 7.72% year to date, while ZUT has returned 22.01%. ZUT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: FORU or ZUT?
As of July 16, 2026, FORU manages $4.54 M in assets, while ZUT manages $852.91 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are FORU and ZUT managed?
FORU is passively managed by LongPoint Asset Management. It tracks the ForAll Core & More US Equity NTR Index - CAD benchmark. ZUT is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: FORU or ZUT?
Year to date, FORU has seen +$1.24 M in net flows, compared with -$125.69 M for ZUT. FORU has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of FORU and ZUT compare?
FORU has an expense ratio of 0.79%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about FORU and ZUT
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.