VS
When evaluating costs, RCDB features a management fee (MER) of 0.15%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, RCDB has returned 1.13% year-to-date with +$118 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 19.97% with -$64 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
RCDB
ZUT
| AuM | $1,389.05 M | $901.63 M |
| Management Fees | 0.15% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.17% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.90% |
Historical performance and flows
As of June 17, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | RCDB | +0.95% | +0.63% | +1.13% | +3.17% | +15.28% |
ZUT | +3.21% | +7.13% | +19.97% | +27.67% | +51.43% | |
| Flows | RCDB | +$3 M | -$35 M | +$118 M | +$183 M | +$398 M |
ZUT | +$0 M | +$16 M | -$64 M | +$86 M | +$242 M |
RCDB vs ZUT exposure
Countries
RCDB
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
85.23%
Bermuda
14.77%
Sectors
RCDB
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
100.00%
As of June 17, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
RCDB
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
BORALEX
10.04%
NORTHLAND POWER
8.09%
ALTAGAS
8.08%
BROOKFIELD RENEWABLE PARTNERS
7.87%
ATCO
7.62%
CAPITAL POWER
7.57%
EMERA
7.48%
ALGONQUIN POWER
7.47%
CANADIAN UTILITIES
7.43%
FORTIS
7.23%
Diversification
RCDB
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
78.87%
Characteristics
Compare
RCDB
ZUT
| Provider | RBC Global Asset Management | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 2.11% | 2.78% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | June 12, 2019 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about RCDB and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: RCDB or ZUT?
As of June 17, 2026, RCDB has returned 1.13% year to date, while ZUT has returned 19.97%. ZUT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: RCDB or ZUT?
As of June 17, 2026, RCDB manages $1.39 B in assets, while ZUT manages $901.63 M. RCDB is the larger fund by AUM.
How are RCDB and ZUT managed?
RCDB is actively managed by RBC Global Asset Management. It does not track an index. ZUT is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: RCDB or ZUT?
Year to date, RCDB has seen +$117.55 M in net flows, compared with -$64.28 M for ZUT. RCDB has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of RCDB and ZUT compare?
RCDB has an expense ratio of 0.17%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about RCDB and ZUT
RBC Canadian Discount Bond ETF reaches $1 Billion in Assets
RCDB has exhibited a compelling performance during its fairly short tenure.
Posted on 11/27/2023 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.