VS
When evaluating costs, NHYB features a management fee (MER) of 0.69%, compared to 0.28% for HEWB. Performance-wise, NHYB has returned 0.93% year-to-date with +$82 M in net flows, whereas HEWB is at 15.02% with +$12 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
NHYB
HEWB
| AuM | $1,448.02 M | $290.21 M |
| Management Fees | 0.69% | 0.28% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.68% | 0.28% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.80% |
Historical performance and flows
As of May 7, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | NHYB | +0.62% | -0.89% | -0.93% | +0.64% | +7.11% |
HEWB | +9.67% | +10.04% | +15.02% | +65.38% | +121.08% | |
| Flows | NHYB | +$13 M | +$55 M | +$82 M | +$232 M | +$244 M |
HEWB | +$8 M | +$9 M | +$12 M | +$7 M | -$3 M |
NHYB vs HEWB exposure
Countries
NHYB
USA
80.00%
Other
20.00%
HEWB
Canada
99.99%
Sectors
NHYB
Other
100.00%
HEWB
Financials
99.99%
As of May 7, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
NHYB
US698ESCAA82
80.00%
HEWB
ROYAL BK CANADA
17.10%
TORONTO DOMINION
16.90%
BNS
16.65%
BANK OF MONTREAL
16.51%
CDN IMPERIAL BK
16.48%
NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA
16.35%
Diversification
NHYB
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 1 total
80.00%
HEWB
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.99%
Characteristics
Compare
NHYB
HEWB
| Provider | National Bank Investments | Global X |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Capitalization |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | March 4, 2020 | January 23, 2019 |
Frequently asked questions about NHYB and HEWB
Which ETF has performed better year to date: NHYB or HEWB?
As of May 7, 2026, NHYB has returned -0.93% year to date, while HEWB has returned 15.02%. HEWB is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: NHYB or HEWB?
As of May 7, 2026, NHYB manages $1.45 B in assets, while HEWB manages $290.21 M. NHYB is the larger fund by AUM.
How are NHYB and HEWB managed?
NHYB is actively managed by National Bank Investments. It does not track an index. HEWB 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: NHYB or HEWB?
Year to date, NHYB has seen +$82.07 M in net flows, compared with +$12.19 M for HEWB. NHYB has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of NHYB and HEWB compare?
NHYB has an expense ratio of 0.68%, while HEWB has an expense ratio of 0.28%.
Which ETF is more diversified: NHYB or HEWB?
NHYB holds 1 securities, while HEWB holds 6. On holdings count, HEWB is the more diversified portfolio.
Recent articles about NHYB and HEWB
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
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.