VS
When evaluating costs, HERO features a management fee (MER) of 0.7%, compared to 0.45% for FCIQ. Performance-wise, HERO has returned 12.97% year-to-date with +$3 M in net flows, whereas FCIQ is at 17.41% with +$547 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
HERO
FCIQ
| AuM | $18.10 M | $2,087.21 M |
| Management Fees | 0.70% | 0.45% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.89% | 0.51% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.89% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 29, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | HERO | +1.03% | -3.03% | -12.97% | -20.42% | +47.51% |
FCIQ | +1.08% | +2.00% | +17.41% | +15.55% | +69.84% | |
| Flows | HERO | +$5 M | +$5 M | +$3 M | +$3 M | -$13 M |
FCIQ | +$44 M | +$120 M | +$547 M | +$629 M | +$1,242 M |
HERO vs FCIQ exposure
Countries
HERO
Japan
47.30%
USA
16.82%
China
13.80%
Republic of Korea
9.55%
Other
12.53%
FCIQ
Exposure data will be available soon
Sectors
HERO
Technology
100.12%
FCIQ
Exposure data will be available soon
As of October 29, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
HERO
Nintendo Co., Ltd.
12.53%
KONAMI Group Corp.
10.29%
NetEase, Inc.
9.85%
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
8.58%
Roblox Corp.
8.10%
Capcom Co., Ltd.
7.78%
NEXON Co., Ltd.
7.02%
International Games System Co., Ltd.
3.70%
Square Enix Holdings Co., Ltd.
3.59%
KRAFTON, Inc
3.51%
FCIQ
Exposure data will be available soon
Diversification
HERO
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 43 total
74.96%
FCIQ
Exposure data will be available soon
Characteristics
Compare
HERO
FCIQ
| Provider | Evolve ETFs | Fidelity |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Solactive eGaming PI Index - CAD | Fidelity Canada International High Quality GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.52% | 1.13% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | June 17, 2019 | January 24, 2019 |
Frequently asked questions about HERO and FCIQ
Which ETF has performed better year to date: HERO or FCIQ?
As of October 29, 2026, HERO has returned -12.97% year to date, while FCIQ has returned 17.41%. FCIQ is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: HERO or FCIQ?
As of October 29, 2026, HERO manages $18.10 M in assets, while FCIQ manages $2.09 B. FCIQ is the larger fund by AUM.
How are HERO and FCIQ managed?
HERO is passively managed by Evolve ETFs. It tracks the Solactive eGaming PI Index - CAD benchmark. FCIQ is passively managed by Fidelity. It tracks the Fidelity Canada International High Quality GTR Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: HERO or FCIQ?
Year to date, HERO has seen +$3.02 M in net flows, compared with +$547.10 M for FCIQ. FCIQ has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of HERO and FCIQ compare?
HERO has an expense ratio of 0.89%, while FCIQ has an expense ratio of 0.51%.
Recent articles about HERO and FCIQ
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.