When evaluating costs, IBIT.U features a management fee (MER) of 0.32%, compared to 0.08% for ZSP. Performance-wise, IBIT.U has returned 7.1% year-to-date with +$4 M in net flows, whereas ZSP is at 16.08% with +$1 B. 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
IBIT.U
ZSP
| AuM | $14.95 M | $25,399.74 M |
| Management Fees | 0.32% | 0.08% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.33% | 0.09% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.59% | -0.05% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | IBIT.U | +7.22% | +26.79% | -7.10% | -24.91% | - |
ZSP | +2.58% | +2.55% | +16.08% | +17.32% | +87.54% | |
| Flows | IBIT.U | +$0 M | -$0 M | +$4 M | +$1 M | +$0 M |
ZSP | +$435 M | +$776 M | +$1,033 M | +$1,834 M | +$5,678 M |
IBIT.U vs ZSP exposure
Countries
IBIT.U
Exposure data will be available soon
ZSP
USA
97.65%
Sectors
IBIT.U
Exposure data will be available soon
ZSP
Technology
45.20%
Finance
13.72%
Healthcare
9.09%
Consumer Non-Cyclicals
8.98%
Industrials
7.57%
Other
15.44%
As of October 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
IBIT.U
Exposure data will be available soon
ZSP
NVIDIA Corp.
7.95%
Apple, Inc.
7.09%
Microsoft Corp.
5.75%
Amazon.com, Inc.
3.93%
Alphabet, Inc.
3.06%
Broadcom Inc.
2.64%
Alphabet, Inc.
2.44%
Meta Platforms, Inc.
1.92%
Micron Technology, Inc.
1.59%
Tesla, Inc.
1.48%
Diversification
IBIT.U
Exposure data will be available soon
ZSP
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 502 total
37.84%
Characteristics
Compare
IBIT.U
ZSP
| Provider | iShares | BMO |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant Index - USD | S&P 500 CAD Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Other | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Cryptocurrencies | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.77% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | January 10, 2025 | November 14, 2012 |
Frequently asked questions about IBIT.U and ZSP
Which ETF has performed better year to date: IBIT.U or ZSP?
As of October 16, 2026, IBIT.U has returned -7.10% year to date, while ZSP has returned 16.08%. ZSP is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: IBIT.U or ZSP?
As of October 16, 2026, IBIT.U manages $14.95 M in assets, while ZSP manages $25.40 B. ZSP is the larger fund by AUM.
How are IBIT.U and ZSP managed?
IBIT.U is passively managed by iShares. It tracks the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant Index - USD benchmark. ZSP is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the S&P 500 CAD Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: IBIT.U or ZSP?
Year to date, IBIT.U has seen +$4.29 M in net flows, compared with +$1,032.65 M for ZSP. ZSP has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of IBIT.U and ZSP compare?
IBIT.U has an expense ratio of 0.33%, while ZSP has an expense ratio of 0.09%.
Recent articles about IBIT.U and ZSP
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.