VS
When evaluating costs, RGQR features a management fee (MER) of 0.15%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, RGQR has returned 0.99% year-to-date with +$24 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 20.43% with -$76 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
RGQR
ZUT
| AuM | $89.28 M | $893.16 M |
| Management Fees | 0.15% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.17% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.90% |
Historical performance and flows
As of June 11, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | RGQR | +0.69% | +0.71% | +0.99% | +2.92% | +14.20% |
ZUT | +3.72% | +9.48% | +20.43% | +29.41% | +47.71% | |
| Flows | RGQR | +$3 M | +$23 M | +$24 M | +$13 M | +$83 M |
ZUT | -$15 M | +$4 M | -$76 M | +$122 M | +$233 M |
RGQR vs ZUT exposure
Countries
RGQR
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
85.23%
Bermuda
14.77%
Sectors
RGQR
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
100.00%
As of June 11, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
RGQR
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
RGQR
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
78.87%
Characteristics
Compare
RGQR
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 | 2.86% | 2.77% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | April 21, 2023 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about RGQR and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: RGQR or ZUT?
As of June 11, 2026, RGQR has returned 0.99% year to date, while ZUT has returned 20.43%. ZUT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: RGQR or ZUT?
As of June 11, 2026, RGQR manages $89.28 M in assets, while ZUT manages $893.16 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are RGQR and ZUT managed?
RGQR 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: RGQR or ZUT?
Year to date, RGQR has seen +$24.21 M in net flows, compared with -$76.24 M for ZUT. RGQR has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of RGQR and ZUT compare?
RGQR has an expense ratio of 0.17%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about RGQR and ZUT
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.