VS
When evaluating costs, GIUS.F features a management fee (MER) of 0.55%, compared to 0.05% for XIC. Performance-wise, GIUS.F has returned 9% year-to-date with -$0 M in net flows, whereas XIC is at 7.93% with +$5 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
GIUS.F
XIC
| AuM | $4.97 M | $28,892.87 M |
| Management Fees | 0.55% | 0.05% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.69% | 0.06% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.12% |
Historical performance and flows
As of May 6, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | GIUS.F | +16.01% | +12.35% | +9.00% | +35.43% | +105.00% |
XIC | +2.56% | +5.24% | +7.93% | +39.31% | +79.67% | |
| Flows | GIUS.F | -$0 M | -$0 M | -$0 M | +$1 M | +$1 M |
XIC | +$1,121 M | +$3,816 M | +$5,192 M | +$7,744 M | +$11,161 M |
GIUS.F vs XIC exposure
Countries
GIUS.F
Exposure data will be available soon
XIC
Canada
98.95%
Sectors
GIUS.F
Exposure data will be available soon
XIC
Financials
28.13%
Energy
18.01%
Materials
15.92%
Other
13.03%
Other
24.92%
As of May 6, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
GIUS.F
Exposure data will be available soon
XIC
ROYAL BK CANADA
6.69%
TORONTO DOMINION
4.64%
SHOPIFY SUBORDINATE VOTING
4.31%
ENBRIDGE
3.50%
AGNICO EAGLE MINES LTD
3.01%
CDN NATURAL RESOURCE
3.01%
BANK OF MONTREAL
2.83%
CA11271J1075
2.65%
CDN IMPERIAL BK
2.61%
BNS
2.53%
Diversification
GIUS.F
Exposure data will be available soon
XIC
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 221 total
35.80%
Characteristics
Compare
GIUS.F
XIC
| Provider | Guardian Capital | iShares |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | S&P/TSX Capped Composite Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 2.07% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | August 11, 2020 | February 16, 2001 |
Frequently asked questions about GIUS.F and XIC
Which ETF has performed better year to date: GIUS.F or XIC?
As of May 6, 2026, GIUS.F has returned 9.00% year to date, while XIC has returned 7.93%. GIUS.F is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: GIUS.F or XIC?
As of May 6, 2026, GIUS.F manages $4.97 M in assets, while XIC manages $28.89 B. XIC is the larger fund by AUM.
How are GIUS.F and XIC managed?
GIUS.F is actively managed by Guardian Capital. It does not track an index. XIC is passively managed by iShares. It tracks the S&P/TSX Capped Composite Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: GIUS.F or XIC?
Year to date, GIUS.F has seen -$0.00 M in net flows, compared with +$5,191.68 M for XIC. XIC has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of GIUS.F and XIC compare?
GIUS.F has an expense ratio of 0.69%, while XIC has an expense ratio of 0.06%.
Recent articles about GIUS.F and XIC
The Top Canadian ETFs by AUM in 2023
These ETFs rank among the largest in the Canadian industry.
Posted on 1/11/2023 by Tony Dong inETFs
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.