VS
When evaluating costs, SCGI features a management fee (MER) of 0.9%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, SCGI has returned 18.16% year-to-date with +$0 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 12.81% with -$95 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
SCGI
ZUT
| AuM | $4.81 M | $814.36 M |
| Management Fees | 0.90% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 1.25% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.80% |
Historical performance and flows
As of September 2, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | SCGI | -2.90% | -3.70% | +18.16% | +23.15% | +59.03% |
ZUT | -6.91% | -5.97% | +12.81% | +18.92% | +48.01% | |
| Flows | SCGI | +$0 M | +$0 M | +$0 M | +$0 M | -$8 M |
ZUT | +$25 M | -$20 M | -$95 M | -$88 M | +$218 M |
SCGI vs ZUT exposure
Countries
SCGI
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
84.41%
Bermuda
15.59%
Sectors
SCGI
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
83.73%
Energy
8.32%
Industrials
7.95%
As of September 2, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
SCGI
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Boralex, Inc.
9.47%
ATCO Ltd.
8.45%
AltaGas Ltd.
8.32%
Canadian Utilities Ltd.
8.09%
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP
7.95%
Capital Power Corp.
7.68%
Brookfield Renewable Partners LP
7.64%
Emera, Inc.
7.35%
TransAlta Corp.
7.18%
Northland Power, Inc.
7.08%
Diversification
SCGI
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 13 total
79.21%
Characteristics
Compare
SCGI
ZUT
| Provider | Starlight Capital | BMO |
| Management | Actively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | - | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 4.29% | 2.93% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | October 2, 2018 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about SCGI and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: SCGI or ZUT?
As of September 2, 2026, SCGI has returned 18.16% year to date, while ZUT has returned 12.81%. SCGI is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: SCGI or ZUT?
As of September 2, 2026, SCGI manages $4.81 M in assets, while ZUT manages $814.36 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are SCGI and ZUT managed?
SCGI is actively managed by Starlight Capital. 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: SCGI or ZUT?
Year to date, SCGI has seen +$0.00 M in net flows, compared with -$94.91 M for ZUT. SCGI has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of SCGI and ZUT compare?
SCGI has an expense ratio of 1.25%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about SCGI and ZUT
SCGI ETF: A Defensive, High-Income Play on the $15T Infrastructure Gap
This fund offers a diversified, income-focused solution for investors to capitalize on the growing multi-trillion dollar global infrastructure gap, with a timely emphasis on energy and utilities.
Posted on 9/9/2025 by Kyle Anthony inInfrastructure
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.