When evaluating costs, HUG features a management fee (MER) of 0.35%, compared to 0.2% for KILO. Performance-wise, HUG has returned 7.78% year-to-date with -$3 M in net flows, whereas KILO is at 8.64% with +$42 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
HUG
KILO
| AuM | $58.02 M | $541.74 M |
| Management Fees | 0.35% | 0.20% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.43% | 0.23% |
| Tracking Difference | - | - |
Historical performance and flows
As of April 24, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | HUG | +7.01% | -8.01% | +7.78% | +36.30% | +117.30% |
KILO | +7.09% | -7.25% | +8.64% | +37.78% | +125.84% | |
| Flows | HUG | -$7 M | -$3 M | -$3 M | -$12 M | +$8 M |
KILO | +$0 M | +$28 M | +$42 M | +$155 M | +$229 M |
HUG vs KILO exposure
Countries
HUG
Exposure data will be available soon
KILO
Exposure data will be available soon
Sectors
HUG
Exposure data will be available soon
KILO
Exposure data will be available soon
As of April 24, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
HUG
Exposure data will be available soon
KILO
Exposure data will be available soon
Diversification
HUG
Exposure data will be available soon
KILO
Exposure data will be available soon
Characteristics
Compare
HUG
KILO
| Provider | Global X | Purpose Investments |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Horizons BetaPro Gold Bullion Excess Return Index - USD | LBMA Gold Price AM - USD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Commodity | Commodity |
| Dividend Policy | Capitalization | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | June 24, 2009 | October 31, 2018 |
Frequently asked questions about HUG and KILO
Which ETF has performed better year to date: HUG or KILO?
As of April 24, 2026, HUG has returned 7.78% year to date, while KILO has returned 8.64%. KILO is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: HUG or KILO?
As of April 24, 2026, HUG manages $58.02 M in assets, while KILO manages $541.74 M. KILO is the larger fund by AUM.
How are HUG and KILO managed?
HUG is passively managed by Global X. It tracks the Horizons BetaPro Gold Bullion Excess Return Index - USD benchmark. KILO is passively managed by Purpose Investments. It tracks the LBMA Gold Price AM - USD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: HUG or KILO?
Year to date, HUG has seen -$3.38 M in net flows, compared with +$41.63 M for KILO. KILO has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of HUG and KILO compare?
HUG has an expense ratio of 0.43%, while KILO has an expense ratio of 0.23%.
Recent articles about HUG and KILO
Oil ETFs Rally as Gold and Silver Retreat in Volatile Week
Canadian energy ETFs rallied alongside oil prices last week as sanctions on Russia tightened global supply expectations, while precious metals corrected sharply following record highs and easing safe-haven demand.
Posted on 10/27/2025 by ETF Market Canada inCommodities
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.