VS
When evaluating costs, ZCLN features a management fee (MER) of 0.35%, compared to 0.89% for HLIT. Performance-wise, ZCLN has returned 14.78% year-to-date with +$12 M in net flows, whereas HLIT is at 2.8% with -$1 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
ZCLN
HLIT
| AuM | $79.51 M | $18.52 M |
| Management Fees | 0.35% | 0.89% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.39% | 0.89% |
| Tracking Difference | - | - |
Historical performance and flows
As of July 17, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | ZCLN | -11.07% | -2.50% | +14.78% | +41.60% | +7.00% |
HLIT | -20.37% | -24.34% | -2.80% | +52.98% | -46.35% | |
| Flows | ZCLN | +$1 M | +$9 M | +$12 M | +$3 M | -$1 M |
HLIT | -$2 M | -$4 M | -$1 M | -$13 M | -$1 M |
ZCLN vs HLIT exposure
Countries
ZCLN
USA
46.31%
China
18.40%
Other
35.29%
HLIT
Exposure data will be available soon
Sectors
ZCLN
Industrials
57.21%
Utilities
31.99%
Technology
9.34%
HLIT
Exposure data will be available soon
As of July 17, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
ZCLN
Bloom Energy Corp.
12.47%
First Solar, Inc.
9.55%
Nextpower, Inc.
7.45%
Enphase Energy, Inc.
6.08%
China Yangtze Power Co., Ltd.
5.25%
Plug Power, Inc.
3.83%
SolarEdge Technologies, Inc.
2.93%
Vestas Wind Systems A/S
2.67%
Equatorial SA
2.28%
Suzlon Energy Ltd.
2.16%
HLIT
Exposure data will be available soon
Diversification
ZCLN
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 103 total
54.67%
HLIT
Exposure data will be available soon
Characteristics
Compare
ZCLN
HLIT
| Provider | BMO | Global X |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | S&P Global Clean Energy Transition Index - USD | Solactive Global Lithium Producers Index NTR - USD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 1.51% | 0.12% |
| Meets ESG criteria | Yes | No |
| Inception Date | January 26, 2020 | June 23, 2021 |
Frequently asked questions about ZCLN and HLIT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: ZCLN or HLIT?
As of July 17, 2026, ZCLN has returned 14.78% year to date, while HLIT has returned -2.80%. ZCLN is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: ZCLN or HLIT?
As of July 17, 2026, ZCLN manages $79.51 M in assets, while HLIT manages $18.52 M. ZCLN is the larger fund by AUM.
How are ZCLN and HLIT managed?
ZCLN is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy Transition Index - USD benchmark. HLIT is passively managed by Global X. It tracks the Solactive Global Lithium Producers Index NTR - USD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: ZCLN or HLIT?
Year to date, ZCLN has seen +$12.30 M in net flows, compared with -$1.06 M for HLIT. ZCLN has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of ZCLN and HLIT compare?
ZCLN has an expense ratio of 0.39%, while HLIT has an expense ratio of 0.89%.
Recent articles about ZCLN and HLIT
Clean Energy ETFs Gain Momentum Amid Hormuz Crisis
Rising oil and gas volatility is pushing investors back toward clean energy ETFs.
Posted on 5/29/2026 by Kyle Anthony inEnergy
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.