VS
When evaluating costs, RQS features a management fee (MER) of 0.2%, compared to 0.28% for HEWB. Performance-wise, RQS has returned 1.22% year-to-date with +$110 M in net flows, whereas HEWB is at 35.73% with +$23 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
RQS
HEWB
| AuM | $418.59 M | $353.97 M |
| Management Fees | 0.20% | 0.28% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.22% | 0.28% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.83% |
Historical performance and flows
As of July 17, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | RQS | -0.09% | +0.48% | +1.22% | +4.13% | - |
HEWB | +6.03% | +19.86% | +35.73% | +71.14% | +157.48% | |
| Flows | RQS | +$17 M | +$52 M | +$110 M | +$189 M | - |
HEWB | +$9 M | +$16 M | +$23 M | +$22 M | +$25 M |
RQS vs HEWB exposure
Countries
RQS
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
Canada
100.00%
Sectors
RQS
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
Finance
100.00%
As of July 17, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
RQS
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
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
RQS
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
100.00%
Characteristics
Compare
RQS
HEWB
| Provider | RBC Global Asset Management | Global X |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | FTSE Canada 2030 Maturity Corporate Bond Index - CAD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Capitalization |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 3.71% | 0.00% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | April 24, 2024 | January 23, 2019 |
Frequently asked questions about RQS and HEWB
Which ETF has performed better year to date: RQS or HEWB?
As of July 17, 2026, RQS has returned 1.22% year to date, while HEWB has returned 35.73%. HEWB is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: RQS or HEWB?
As of July 17, 2026, RQS manages $418.59 M in assets, while HEWB manages $353.97 M. RQS is the larger fund by AUM.
How are RQS and HEWB managed?
RQS is passively managed by RBC Global Asset Management. It tracks the FTSE Canada 2030 Maturity Corporate Bond Index - CAD benchmark. 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: RQS or HEWB?
Year to date, RQS has seen +$110.50 M in net flows, compared with +$23.13 M for HEWB. RQS has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of RQS and HEWB compare?
RQS has an expense ratio of 0.22%, while HEWB has an expense ratio of 0.28%.
Recent articles about RQS 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
HEB ETF Spotlight: Hamilton's Newest Addition to its ETF Offering
Meet HEB, Hamilton’s new low-cost Big Six Canadian Bank ETF.
Posted on 5/2/2023 by ETF Market Canada inETFs
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.