VS
When evaluating costs, SOLL features a management fee (MER) of 0.39%, compared to 0.55% for ZUT. Performance-wise, SOLL has returned 18.22% year-to-date with -$15 M in net flows, whereas ZUT is at 16.24% with -$70 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
SOLL
ZUT
| AuM | $27.77 M | $862.78 M |
| Management Fees | 0.39% | 0.55% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.39% | 0.61% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.73% |
Historical performance and flows
As of October 16, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | SOLL | +5.71% | +35.80% | -18.22% | -45.41% | - |
ZUT | +3.85% | -4.33% | +16.24% | +9.35% | +69.53% | |
| Flows | SOLL | -$2 M | -$3 M | -$15 M | -$3 M | - |
ZUT | +$25 M | +$56 M | -$70 M | -$4 M | +$257 M |
SOLL vs ZUT exposure
Countries
SOLL
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Canada
82.83%
Bermuda
17.17%
Sectors
SOLL
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Utilities
82.26%
Energy
9.30%
Industrials
8.44%
As of October 16, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
SOLL
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
AltaGas Ltd.
9.30%
ATCO Ltd.
9.15%
Canadian Utilities Ltd.
8.78%
Brookfield Renewable Partners LP
8.73%
Capital Power Corp.
8.69%
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP
8.44%
Northland Power, Inc.
8.00%
TransAlta Corp.
7.98%
Emera, Inc.
7.97%
Fortis, Inc.
7.90%
Diversification
SOLL
Exposure data will be available soon
ZUT
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 12 total
84.93%
Characteristics
Compare
SOLL
ZUT
| Provider | Purpose Investments | BMO |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | Compass 3.45pm - 4pm NY TWAP Solana Index - USD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Utilities Total Return Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Cryptocurrencies | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 2.85% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | April 11, 2025 | January 19, 2010 |
Frequently asked questions about SOLL and ZUT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: SOLL or ZUT?
As of October 16, 2026, SOLL has returned -18.22% year to date, while ZUT has returned 16.24%. ZUT is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: SOLL or ZUT?
As of October 16, 2026, SOLL manages $27.77 M in assets, while ZUT manages $862.78 M. ZUT is the larger fund by AUM.
How are SOLL and ZUT managed?
SOLL is passively managed by Purpose Investments. It tracks the Compass 3.45pm - 4pm NY TWAP Solana Index - USD benchmark. 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: SOLL or ZUT?
Year to date, SOLL has seen -$14.60 M in net flows, compared with -$69.96 M for ZUT. SOLL has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of SOLL and ZUT compare?
SOLL has an expense ratio of 0.39%, while ZUT has an expense ratio of 0.61%.
Recent articles about SOLL 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.