VS
When evaluating costs, ONEB features a management fee (MER) of 0.55%, compared to 0.09% for HBNK. Performance-wise, ONEB has returned 0.39% year-to-date with +$12 M in net flows, whereas HBNK is at 32.46% with -$509 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
ONEB
HBNK
| AuM | $94.43 M | $736.43 M |
| Management Fees | 0.55% | 0.09% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.64% | 0.10% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.35% |
Historical performance and flows
As of September 3, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | ONEB | -0.61% | -0.70% | +0.39% | +1.41% | +12.48% |
HBNK | -0.30% | +11.09% | +32.46% | +55.67% | +162.45% | |
| Flows | ONEB | +$2 M | +$7 M | +$12 M | -$0 M | +$5 M |
HBNK | +$7 M | -$91 M | -$509 M | -$686 M | -$82 M |
ONEB vs HBNK exposure
Countries
ONEB
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Canada
99.59%
Sectors
ONEB
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Finance
99.59%
As of September 3, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
ONEB
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Royal Bank of Canada
17.26%
Bank of Montreal
17.04%
The Toronto-Dominion Bank
16.90%
The Bank of Nova Scotia
16.41%
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
16.05%
National Bank of Canada
15.93%
Diversification
ONEB
Exposure data will be available soon
HBNK
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.59%
Characteristics
Compare
ONEB
HBNK
| Provider | CI | 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 | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 3.11% | 2.59% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | October 12, 2018 | July 5, 2023 |
Frequently asked questions about ONEB and HBNK
Which ETF has performed better year to date: ONEB or HBNK?
As of September 3, 2026, ONEB has returned 0.39% year to date, while HBNK has returned 32.46%. HBNK is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: ONEB or HBNK?
As of September 3, 2026, ONEB manages $94.43 M in assets, while HBNK manages $736.43 M. HBNK is the larger fund by AUM.
How are ONEB and HBNK managed?
ONEB is actively managed by CI. 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: ONEB or HBNK?
Year to date, ONEB has seen +$12.27 M in net flows, compared with -$509.07 M for HBNK. ONEB has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of ONEB and HBNK compare?
ONEB has an expense ratio of 0.64%, while HBNK has an expense ratio of 0.10%.
Recent articles about ONEB and HBNK
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.