VS
When evaluating costs, MGDV features a management fee (MER) of 0.8%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, MGDV has returned 8.81% year-to-date with +$9 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 35.86% with -$461 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
MGDV
HBNK
| AuM | $378.55 M | $807.27 M |
| Management Fees | 0.80% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.89% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.44% |
Historical performance and flows
As of July 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | MGDV | +1.22% | +6.09% | +8.81% | +15.57% | - |
HBNK | +6.04% | +19.91% | +35.86% | +71.53% | +159.08% | |
| Flows | MGDV | +$0 M | -$34 M | +$9 M | +$28 M | - |
HBNK | -$44 M | +$39 M | -$461 M | -$767 M | +$3 M |
MGDV vs HBNK exposure
Countries
MGDV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
100.00%
Sectors
MGDV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Finance
100.00%
As of July 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
MGDV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
The Toronto-Dominion Bank
17.52%
Royal Bank of Canada
17.09%
Bank of Montreal
16.85%
The Bank of Nova Scotia
16.38%
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
16.27%
National Bank of Canada
15.89%
Diversification
MGDV
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
100.00%
Characteristics
Compare
MGDV
HBNK
| Provider | Mackenzie Investments | Global X |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.83% | 2.48% |
| Meets ESG criteria | Yes | No |
| Inception Date | June 6, 2024 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about MGDV and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: MGDV or HBNK?
As of July 16, 2026, MGDV has returned 8.81% year to date, while HBNK has returned 35.86%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: MGDV or HBNK?
As of July 16, 2026, MGDV manages $378.55 M in assets, while HBNK manages $807.27 M. HBNK is the larger fund by AUM.
How are MGDV and HBNK managed?
MGDV is actively managed by Mackenzie Investments. It does not track an index. HBNK is passively managed by Global X. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: MGDV or HBNK?
Year to date, MGDV has seen +$8.79 M in net flows, compared with -$461.23 M for HBNK. MGDV has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of MGDV and HBNK compare?
MGDV has an expense ratio of 0.89%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about MGDV and HBNK
Bank Stocks: An Undervalued Gem?
Bank stocks are poised for growth amid declining inflation and rate cuts.
Posted on 7/29/2024 by ETF Market Canada inBanks
Canadian ETF Industry Recap: June 2024
A monthly look back at the Canadian ETF landscape and its developments.
Posted on 7/24/2024 by Kyle Anthony 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.