VS
When evaluating costs, GBLF features a management fee (MER) of 0.2%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, GBLF has returned 1.64% year-to-date with +$2 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 16.24% with -$70 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
GBLF
ZUT
| AuM | $11.98 M | $862.78 M |
| Management Fees | 0.20% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.28% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.73% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | GBLF | +0.31% | +0.40% | +1.64% | +1.85% | - |
ZUT | +3.85% | -4.33% | +16.24% | +9.35% | +69.53% | |
| Flows | GBLF | +$4 M | +$2 M | +$2 M | +$1 M | - |
ZUT | +$25 M | +$56 M | -$70 M | -$4 M | +$257 M |
GBLF vs ZUT exposure
Countries
GBLF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
82.83%
Bermuda
17.17%
Sectors
GBLF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
82.26%
Energy
9.30%
Industrials
8.44%
As of October 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
GBLF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
AltaGas Ltd.
9.30%
ATCO Ltd.
9.15%
Canadian Utilities Ltd.
8.78%
Brookfield Renewable Partners LP
8.73%
Capital Power Corp.
8.69%
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP
8.44%
Northland Power, Inc.
8.00%
TransAlta Corp.
7.98%
Emera, Inc.
7.97%
Fortis, Inc.
7.90%
Diversification
GBLF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 12 total
84.93%
Characteristics
Compare
GBLF
ZUT
| Provider | Guardian Capital | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | - | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 1.63% | 2.85% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | January 9, 2024 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about GBLF and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: GBLF or ZUT?
As of October 16, 2026, GBLF has returned 1.64% year to date, while ZUT has returned 16.24%. ZUT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: GBLF or ZUT?
As of October 16, 2026, GBLF manages $11.98 M in assets, while ZUT manages $862.78 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are GBLF and ZUT managed?
GBLF is actively managed by Guardian Capital. It does not track an index. 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: GBLF or ZUT?
Year to date, GBLF has seen +$1.68 M in net flows, compared with -$69.96 M for ZUT. GBLF has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of GBLF and ZUT compare?
GBLF has an expense ratio of 0.28%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about GBLF 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.