VS
When evaluating costs, HAF features a management fee (MER) of 0.58%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, HAF has returned 0.88% year-to-date with +$2 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 12.68% with -$96 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
HAF
ZUT
| AuM | $66.17 M | $811.97 M |
| Management Fees | 0.58% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.59% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.80% |
Historical performance and flows
As of September 3, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | HAF | -0.91% | -1.94% | +0.88% | -0.26% | +7.52% |
ZUT | -7.03% | -6.25% | +12.68% | +19.36% | +47.83% | |
| Flows | HAF | -$0 M | +$2 M | +$2 M | +$7 M | +$40 M |
ZUT | +$23 M | -$18 M | -$96 M | -$89 M | +$217 M |
HAF vs ZUT exposure
Countries
HAF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
84.41%
Bermuda
15.59%
Sectors
HAF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
83.73%
Energy
8.32%
Industrials
7.95%
As of September 3, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
HAF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Boralex, Inc.
9.47%
ATCO Ltd.
8.45%
AltaGas Ltd.
8.32%
Canadian Utilities Ltd.
8.09%
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP
7.95%
Capital Power Corp.
7.68%
Brookfield Renewable Partners LP
7.64%
Emera, Inc.
7.35%
TransAlta Corp.
7.18%
Northland Power, Inc.
7.08%
Diversification
HAF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
79.21%
Characteristics
Compare
HAF
ZUT
| Provider | Global X | 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 | 4.72% | 2.93% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | July 20, 2009 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about HAF and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: HAF or ZUT?
As of September 3, 2026, HAF has returned 0.88% year to date, while ZUT has returned 12.68%. ZUT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: HAF or ZUT?
As of September 3, 2026, HAF manages $66.17 M in assets, while ZUT manages $811.97 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are HAF and ZUT managed?
HAF is actively managed by Global X. 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: HAF or ZUT?
Year to date, HAF has seen +$2.47 M in net flows, compared with -$96.30 M for ZUT. HAF has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of HAF and ZUT compare?
HAF has an expense ratio of 0.59%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about HAF 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.