When evaluating costs, ICGB features a management fee (MER) of 0.55%, compared to 0.08% for ZSP. Performance-wise, ICGB has returned 4.65% year-to-date with -$17 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
ICGB
ZSP
| AuM | $140.45 M | $25,399.74 M |
| Management Fees | 0.55% | 0.08% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.62% | 0.09% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.05% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | ICGB | -0.75% | -2.60% | -4.65% | -5.69% | - |
ZSP | +2.58% | +2.55% | +16.08% | +17.32% | +87.54% | |
| Flows | ICGB | -$1 M | -$1 M | -$17 M | -$20 M | - |
ZSP | +$435 M | +$776 M | +$1,033 M | +$1,834 M | +$5,678 M |
ICGB vs ZSP exposure
Countries
ICGB
Exposure data will be available soon
ZSP
USA
97.65%
Sectors
ICGB
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
ICGB
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
ICGB
Exposure data will be available soon
ZSP
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 502 total
37.84%
Characteristics
Compare
ICGB
ZSP
| Provider | Invesco | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | S&P 500 CAD Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | - | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.77% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | August 15, 2024 | November 14, 2012 |
Frequently asked questions about ICGB and ZSP
Which ETF has performed better year to date: ICGB or ZSP?
As of October 16, 2026, ICGB has returned -4.65% year to date, while ZSP has returned 16.08%. ZSP is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: ICGB or ZSP?
As of October 16, 2026, ICGB manages $140.45 M in assets, while ZSP manages $25.40 B. ZSP is the larger fund by AUM.
How are ICGB and ZSP managed?
ICGB is actively managed by Invesco. It does not track an index. 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: ICGB or ZSP?
Year to date, ICGB has seen -$16.66 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 ICGB and ZSP compare?
ICGB has an expense ratio of 0.62%, while ZSP has an expense ratio of 0.09%.
Recent articles about ICGB and ZSP
A Guide to Active vs Passive ETFs for Canadian Investors
Discover the difference between active and passive ETFs in this comprehensive guide. Learn about their strategies, advantages, drawbacks, and how to combine both for a balanced investment approach.
Posted on 7/19/2023 by Tony Dong inETF Ecosystem
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.