VS
When evaluating costs, ZGI features a management fee (MER) of 0.55%, compared to 0.45% for QIF. Performance-wise, ZGI has returned 10.96% year-to-date with -$6 M in net flows, whereas QIF is at 11.96% with -$11 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
ZGI
QIF
| AuM | $478.07 M | $145.69 M |
| Management Fees | 0.55% | 0.45% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.61% | 0.45% |
| Tracking Difference | -0.28% | - |
Historical performance and flows
As of April 27, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | ZGI | -3.04% | +8.11% | +10.96% | +11.10% | +41.20% |
QIF | +1.79% | +7.52% | +11.96% | +24.17% | +50.54% | |
| Flows | ZGI | -$3 M | -$5 M | -$6 M | -$149 M | -$280 M |
QIF | -$2 M | -$10 M | -$11 M | -$54 M | -$161 M |
ZGI vs QIF exposure
Countries
ZGI
USA
78.32%
Canada
21.58%
QIF
Exposure data will be available soon
Sectors
ZGI
Energy
44.69%
Utilities
34.90%
Real Estate
10.32%
Other
9.98%
QIF
Exposure data will be available soon
As of April 27, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
ZGI
ENBRIDGE
9.23%
WILLIAMS
6.90%
US6362744095
6.48%
AMERICAN TOWER CL A REIT
6.21%
KINDER MORGAN
5.13%
TC ENERGY CORP
5.11%
CHENIERE ENERGY
4.93%
SEMPRA ENERGY
4.91%
ONEOK
4.55%
TARGA RESOURCS
4.15%
QIF
Exposure data will be available soon
Diversification
ZGI
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 49 total
57.60%
QIF
Exposure data will be available soon
Characteristics
Compare
ZGI
QIF
| Provider | BMO | AGF |
| Management | Passively managed | Actively managed |
| Benchmark | Dow Jones Brookfield Global Infrastructure North American Listed Net Total Return Index - CAD | - |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | |
| Asset Class | Equity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 2.38% | 3.73% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | January 19, 2010 | February 12, 2018 |
Frequently asked questions about ZGI and QIF
Which ETF has performed better year to date: ZGI or QIF?
As of April 27, 2026, ZGI has returned 10.96% year to date, while QIF has returned 11.96%. QIF is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: ZGI or QIF?
As of April 27, 2026, ZGI manages $478.07 M in assets, while QIF manages $145.69 M. ZGI is the larger fund by AUM.
How are ZGI and QIF managed?
ZGI is passively managed by BMO. It tracks the Dow Jones Brookfield Global Infrastructure North American Listed Net Total Return Index - CAD benchmark. QIF is actively managed by AGF. It does not track an index.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: ZGI or QIF?
Year to date, ZGI has seen -$5.93 M in net flows, compared with -$11.04 M for QIF. ZGI has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of ZGI and QIF compare?
ZGI has an expense ratio of 0.61%, while QIF has an expense ratio of 0.45%.
Recent articles about ZGI and QIF
3 Canadian ETFs that Beat Inflation in 2022
These ETFs managed to stay in the green despite soaring inflation this year.
Posted on 1/3/2023 by Tony Dong inInflation
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.