VS
When evaluating costs, HPF features a management fee (MER) of 0.85%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, HPF has returned 32.46% 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
HPF
ZUT
| AuM | $63.46 M | $852.91 M |
| Management Fees | 0.85% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.99% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.85% |
Historical performance and flows
As of July 17, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | HPF | +7.06% | +8.06% | +32.46% | +41.38% | +53.39% |
ZUT | +1.71% | +5.71% | +22.01% | +27.22% | +54.59% | |
| Flows | HPF | +$1 M | +$1 M | +$1 M | +$7 M | +$13 M |
ZUT | -$60 M | -$66 M | -$126 M | -$42 M | +$188 M |
HPF vs ZUT exposure
Countries
HPF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
83.77%
Bermuda
16.23%
Sectors
HPF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
84.34%
Energy
8.20%
Industrials
7.46%
As of July 17, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
HPF
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
HPF
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
79.35%
Characteristics
Compare
HPF
ZUT
| Provider | Harvest Portfolios Group | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 7.84% | 2.72% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | October 21, 2014 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about HPF and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: HPF or ZUT?
As of July 17, 2026, HPF has returned 32.46% year to date, while ZUT has returned 22.01%. HPF is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: HPF or ZUT?
As of July 17, 2026, HPF manages $63.46 M in assets, while ZUT manages $852.91 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are HPF and ZUT managed?
HPF is actively managed by Harvest Portfolios Group. 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: HPF or ZUT?
Year to date, HPF has seen +$0.53 M in net flows, compared with -$125.69 M for ZUT. HPF has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of HPF and ZUT compare?
HPF has an expense ratio of 0.99%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about HPF 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.