VS
When evaluating costs, HXH features a management fee (MER) of 0.11%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, HXH has returned 22.59% year-to-date with +$33 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 10.97% with -$95 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
HXH
ZUT
| AuM | $260.84 M | $801.08 M |
| Management Fees | 0.11% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.11% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.42% | -0.80% |
Historical performance and flows
As of September 14, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | HXH | -1.80% | +0.20% | +22.59% | +31.15% | +81.87% |
ZUT | -7.29% | -8.19% | +10.97% | +15.84% | +44.54% | |
| Flows | HXH | +$4 M | +$17 M | +$33 M | +$33 M | +$74 M |
ZUT | +$17 M | -$29 M | -$95 M | -$106 M | +$217 M |
HXH vs ZUT exposure
Countries
HXH
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
84.41%
Bermuda
15.59%
Sectors
HXH
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
83.73%
Energy
8.32%
Industrials
7.95%
As of September 14, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
HXH
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
HXH
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
79.21%
Characteristics
Compare
HXH
ZUT
| Provider | Global X | BMO |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Solactive Canadian High Dividend Yield Total Return Index - CAD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Indirect | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Capitalization | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 2.98% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | April 8, 2016 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about HXH and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: HXH or ZUT?
As of September 14, 2026, HXH has returned 22.59% year to date, while ZUT has returned 10.97%. HXH is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: HXH or ZUT?
As of September 14, 2026, HXH manages $260.84 M in assets, while ZUT manages $801.08 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are HXH and ZUT managed?
HXH is passively managed by Global X. It tracks the Solactive Canadian High Dividend Yield Total Return Index - CAD benchmark. 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: HXH or ZUT?
Year to date, HXH has seen +$33.30 M in net flows, compared with -$94.91 M for ZUT. HXH has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of HXH and ZUT compare?
HXH has an expense ratio of 0.11%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about HXH 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.