XEQT vs MEQT: How Does Mackenzie's All-Equity ETF Stack Up?

A couple of months ago, a buddy from my hockey league pulled me aside after our game and said, “Hey, I just bought a bunch of MEQT. My advisor told me it’s basically the same as XEQT but from Mackenzie. Did I mess up?”

I told him to relax and buy me a beer first. Then we talked it through.

The truth is, I’d been meaning to dig into MEQT for a while. I kept seeing it pop up in r/PersonalFinanceCanada threads – someone would ask about XEQT, and inevitably a comment would say, “What about MEQT? It’s basically the same thing.” But “basically the same thing” doesn’t really cut it when we’re talking about where you park your life savings, does it?

So I finally sat down and compared them properly. Here’s everything I found.

1. What is MEQT?

MEQT (Mackenzie All Equity All World ETF) is Mackenzie Investments’ entry into the all-equity, all-in-one ETF space in Canada. It trades on the TSX under the ticker MEQT.TO and aims to give you broad global equity exposure in a single purchase – similar to what XEQT, VEQT, ZEQT, and FEQT are all trying to do.

Who is Mackenzie Investments?

Mackenzie Investments is a subsidiary of IGM Financial, which itself is controlled by Power Corporation of Canada – one of the largest conglomerates in the country. If you’ve heard of Investors Group (now IG Wealth Management) or Great-West Lifeco, they’re all part of the same corporate family.

Mackenzie has been around since 1967, so they’re not some fly-by-night operation. They manage over $200 billion in assets across mutual funds and ETFs. That said, they’re much better known for their mutual fund business. Their ETF lineup is newer and still growing.

MEQT at a Glance

• Full Name: Mackenzie All Equity All World ETF
• Ticker: MEQT.TO
• MER: ~0.22%
• Strategy: Passive, globally diversified, 100% equities
• Exchange: TSX
• Holdings: Global equities across Canada, US, international developed, and emerging markets

MEQT is designed to be a one-stop shop for equity investors. You buy one ETF and you get exposure to thousands of companies across the globe. Sound familiar? It should – that’s exactly what XEQT does.

2. Quick XEQT Refresher

If you’re a regular reader, you already know what XEQT is. But here’s a quick recap for anyone new.

XEQT (iShares Core Equity ETF Portfolio) is the most popular all-equity ETF in Canada. It’s managed by iShares, which is BlackRock’s ETF brand – and BlackRock is the largest asset manager on the planet.

XEQT Key Facts

• MER: 0.20%
• Holdings: 12,000+ stocks worldwide
• Launch Date: August 2019
• AUM: ~$8B+
• Strategy: Passive, market-cap-weighted indexing

XEQT Geographic Allocation

• US Equity: ~45%
• Canadian Equity: ~25%
• International Developed: ~25%
• Emerging Markets: ~5%

XEQT achieves this by holding just 4 underlying iShares ETFs:

1. ITOT – iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
2. XIC – iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF
3. XEF – iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF
4. IEMG – iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF

It’s clean, it’s simple, and it’s been the gold standard in this category since it launched.

3. Head-to-Head Comparison: XEQT vs MEQT

Let’s lay it all out in a table so you can see how these two stack up side by side.

A few things jump out immediately. The MERs are close but not identical. The AUM gap is massive. And the geographic allocations are similar but not a perfect match.

Let’s unpack each of these differences.

4. Fee Comparison: Does 0.02% Actually Matter?

This is the question I get asked most often when people compare these two ETFs. XEQT charges an MER of 0.20%, while MEQT comes in at approximately 0.22%.

That’s a difference of 0.02 percentage points. Let’s be honest – that sounds like absolutely nothing. And in most practical scenarios, it is.

But let’s do the math anyway, because that’s what we do here.

The 0.02% Difference Over 25 Years

Assuming a 7% average annual return before fees:

On $100,000 invested over 25 years, the 0.02% MER difference costs you roughly $1,060. That’s about $42 per year, or $3.50 per month. You spend more than that on your morning coffee run.

Even on a half-million dollar portfolio over a quarter century, we’re talking about $5,300 – meaningful in absolute terms, but not exactly a dealbreaker when you’re sitting on $2.6 million.

The bottom line on fees: The MER difference between XEQT and MEQT is not a reason to choose one over the other. If MEQT charged 0.40% or 0.50%, we’d have a different conversation. But at 0.22% vs 0.20%, this is a rounding error in the grand scheme of your investing career.

5. Geographic Allocation: The Subtle Differences

Both XEQT and MEQT aim for global equity coverage, but their exact geographic weightings differ slightly.

XEQT Geographic Breakdown

• US: ~45%
• Canada: ~25%
• International Developed (Europe, Japan, Australia, etc.): ~25%
• Emerging Markets (China, India, Brazil, etc.): ~5%

MEQT Geographic Breakdown

• US: ~43%
• Canada: ~26%
• International Developed: ~25%
• Emerging Markets: ~6%

What Do These Differences Mean?

MEQT tilts slightly more toward Canadian equities and emerging markets, while XEQT has a marginally heavier US weighting.

In practical terms, this means:

• MEQT gives you slightly more Canadian home bias – which could be a positive if you believe in Canadian banks and resource stocks, or a negative if you think Canada is already overrepresented in your life (your job, your house, your existing investments).

• MEQT’s slightly higher emerging markets weight (~6% vs ~5%) gives you a touch more exposure to faster-growing economies like India and Southeast Asia. The difference is too small to meaningfully impact returns.

• XEQT’s higher US allocation (~45% vs ~43%) means slightly more exposure to the world’s largest economy and biggest tech companies.

My take: These differences are marginal. Over a 20-30 year horizon, 1-2 percentage point variations in geographic weighting won’t make a noticeable difference. Both funds give you broad, diversified global exposure, and that’s what matters.

6. Underlying Fund Structure: How They’re Built

One area where XEQT and MEQT differ more meaningfully is how they’re constructed under the hood.

XEQT’s Structure

XEQT is a fund of funds – it holds 4 underlying iShares ETFs:

1. ITOT (iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF) – ~45%
2. XIC (iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index ETF) – ~25%
3. XEF (iShares Core MSCI EAFE IMI Index ETF) – ~25%
4. IEMG (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) – ~5%

This is elegant in its simplicity. Four building blocks, each tracking a well-known index, all managed by iShares. The underlying ETFs are massive, liquid, and have long track records.

MEQT’s Structure

MEQT also uses a fund-of-funds approach, but it holds Mackenzie’s own underlying ETFs to build its global exposure. These include Mackenzie’s US equity, Canadian equity, international, and emerging markets funds.

The key difference here is scale. iShares’ underlying ETFs (like ITOT and IEMG) are among the largest ETFs in the world, with hundreds of billions in assets under management. Mackenzie’s underlying funds are significantly smaller.

Does this matter? For most retail investors, probably not. Mackenzie’s underlying ETFs are still liquid enough for normal trading. But the massive scale of iShares’ building blocks means tighter tracking to benchmarks, lower internal trading costs, and more efficient portfolio management.

7. Liquidity and Trading Volume: Where XEQT Dominates

This is one area where the gap between XEQT and MEQT is genuinely significant.

The Numbers

• XEQT AUM: ~$8 billion+
• MEQT AUM: ~$800 million+

XEQT is roughly 10 times larger than MEQT in terms of assets under management. And that gap shows up in daily trading volume too.

Why Liquidity Matters

You might be thinking, “I’m just buying $500 worth of ETFs every month. Why do I care about liquidity?” Fair question. Here’s why:

1. Bid-ask spread – More liquid ETFs typically have tighter bid-ask spreads, meaning you pay less in hidden trading costs every time you buy or sell. On XEQT, the spread is usually just a penny or two. On MEQT, it can be slightly wider, especially during volatile markets.

2. Price accuracy – Highly liquid ETFs tend to trade closer to their net asset value (NAV). Less liquid ETFs can sometimes trade at small premiums or discounts to NAV.

3. Large orders – If you’re ever selling a large position (say, $50,000+ in a single trade), you want deep liquidity to fill your order without moving the price against you.

For the average investor buying a few hundred or a few thousand dollars per month, MEQT’s liquidity is perfectly adequate. You won’t have any trouble executing your trades. But XEQT’s superior liquidity is an objective advantage, especially as your portfolio grows.

I remember early in my investing journey I didn’t think much about liquidity – I was buying $200 at a time and couldn’t imagine a scenario where it mattered. Fast forward a few years and I was rolling over a decent sum from an old employer RRSP. The peace of mind of trading a massive, liquid ETF like XEQT was something I was genuinely grateful for.

8. Performance Comparison: How Close Are They?

Given that both XEQT and MEQT are passively tracking global equity markets with very similar geographic allocations, you’d expect their performance to be nearly identical. And you’d be right.

Since MEQT launched, the two ETFs have tracked each other closely. Any differences in annual returns have been small – typically within a fraction of a percent. This is exactly what you’d expect from two funds with similar mandates, similar geographic weightings, and nearly identical MERs.

Where Small Differences Come From

When you see XEQT up 15.2% and MEQT up 15.0% in a given year, the gap usually comes down to:

• Slightly different index providers or methodologies – The benchmarks each fund tracks aren’t perfectly identical, so small differences in constituent stocks and weightings exist.
• Rebalancing timing – Even though both rebalance quarterly, they don’t do it on the exact same day. Market movements between rebalancing dates create minor divergences.
• MER differences – MEQT’s 0.02% higher MER creates a small drag, though it’s barely noticeable on an annual basis.
• Cash drag – Each fund holds slightly different levels of cash for redemptions and distributions, which affects returns marginally.

The key takeaway: Don’t pick between XEQT and MEQT based on recent performance. One might edge ahead by 0.1% one year and trail by 0.1% the next. Over a 20-year horizon, their returns should be extremely similar. Picking the fund that happened to outperform last year is just chasing noise.

9. The Provider Question: BlackRock vs Mackenzie

Something I don’t see discussed enough in these comparisons is the provider behind the ETF. It actually matters more than you might think.

iShares (BlackRock)

BlackRock is the largest asset manager in the world, with over $10 trillion in assets under management globally. Their iShares brand is the dominant ETF provider worldwide. In Canada, iShares has been running ETFs for over two decades.

What does this mean for you as an XEQT holder? Economies of scale – BlackRock’s massive size means lower operating costs, better benchmark tracking, and world-class operational infrastructure.

Mackenzie Investments

Mackenzie is a well-established Canadian asset manager with a long history in mutual funds. Their ETF business is newer but growing. Being part of the Power Corporation / IGM Financial family gives them substantial financial backing.

The concern some investors have is whether Mackenzie will maintain its low-cost ETF lineup long-term. Historically, Mackenzie has been more associated with higher-cost actively managed products. Their push into low-cost passive ETFs is more recent, and while it’s encouraging, it doesn’t have the same track record as iShares.

That said, Mackenzie isn’t going anywhere. They’re backed by one of the most powerful financial conglomerates in Canada, and the trend toward low-cost ETFs is not reversing.

10. Tax-Loss Harvesting: A Sneaky Advantage of Having Both

Here’s a scenario that actually came up for me last year. The market dipped about 8% in a short stretch, and I was sitting on some unrealized losses in my non-registered account. I wanted to harvest those losses to offset capital gains from a rental property sale – but the superficial loss rule meant I couldn’t just sell XEQT and buy it back within 30 days.

Enter MEQT.

Because MEQT is a different fund from a different provider tracking a similar but not identical mandate, selling XEQT and immediately buying MEQT should not trigger the superficial loss rule (though you should confirm with your own accountant – I’m not your tax advisor).

This is the same strategy that works with XEQT and ZEQT – and MEQT gives you yet another option in your tax-loss harvesting toolkit.

So even if you’re firmly in the XEQT camp, it’s worth knowing MEQT exists as a potential tax-loss harvesting partner.

11. Which Should You Pick? The Honest Answer

I’ve spent the last 3,000 words comparing these two ETFs, so let me give you the straight answer.

Choose XEQT if:

• You want the largest, most liquid all-equity ETF in Canada
• You value BlackRock’s track record and global scale
• You prefer the lowest MER (0.20% vs 0.22%)
• You want the ETF with the longest history in this category
• You’re starting fresh and don’t hold either fund yet
• You want the tightest possible bid-ask spreads

Choose MEQT if:

• You already hold MEQT and it’s working fine for you
• You prefer Mackenzie as a provider (maybe your advisor uses them)
• You want a tax-loss harvesting partner for XEQT
• You want slightly more emerging markets exposure
• You like the idea of supporting a Canadian-headquartered asset manager

The Bottom Line

Both XEQT and MEQT are excellent all-equity ETFs. They both give you broad global equity exposure at rock-bottom costs. If you hold either one for 20-30 years and contribute consistently, you’re going to do great.

But if I’m recommending one to a friend – or buying one myself – it’s XEQT. The reasons come down to:

1. Lower MER (0.20% vs 0.22%) – small, but it’s still an advantage
2. Massive liquidity – 10x the AUM means tighter spreads and better price execution
3. Longer track record – XEQT has been around since 2019 and has proven itself through multiple market environments
4. Provider scale – BlackRock’s infrastructure is unmatched
5. Community and resources – There’s more educational content, more discussion, and more tools built around XEQT

If you already own MEQT? Don’t sell it. Selling triggers a taxable event (in non-registered accounts), and the difference between these two funds is not worth the tax hit. MEQT is a perfectly good ETF. Keep contributing to it, or if you want, start directing new contributions to XEQT going forward.

My hockey buddy? I told him he was fine. He bought a solid ETF at a low cost that gives him global equity exposure. That’s 95% of the battle right there. The other 5% – the tiny MER difference, the liquidity gap – is just optimization. Nice to have, but not worth losing sleep over.

12. How to Buy XEQT (or MEQT) Commission-Free

If you’ve decided XEQT is the right call – or even if you want to pick up some MEQT – the easiest way to buy either ETF in Canada is through Wealthsimple.

Step 1: Open Your Account

Wealthsimple offers commission-free trading on all Canadian-listed ETFs, including both XEQT and MEQT.

Step 2: Fund Your Account

Link your bank account, transfer funds (1-2 business days), and start with as little as $1.

Step 3: Search and Buy

Type “XEQT” (or “MEQT”) in the search bar, enter the amount you want to invest, and hit “Buy.” The whole process takes about 10 minutes. Once you’re in, set up automatic deposits and build your portfolio on autopilot.

Frequently Asked Questions

“Is MEQT just a copy of XEQT?”

Not exactly. MEQT and XEQT have similar mandates – global, all-equity, passive – but they use different underlying funds, track slightly different benchmarks, and have modestly different geographic weightings. Think of them as cousins, not twins.

“Can I hold both XEQT and MEQT?”

You can, but there’s no real benefit. You’d be doubling up on nearly identical exposure and adding unnecessary complexity. The only scenario where holding both makes sense is tax-loss harvesting – selling one at a loss and buying the other to maintain your market exposure.

“Should I switch from MEQT to XEQT?”

If you’re in a TFSA or RRSP, there’s no tax cost to switching, so you could make the move if you prefer XEQT’s lower MER and higher liquidity. In a non-registered account, selling MEQT triggers a capital gains event (or a capital loss you can use), so the math is more nuanced. In most cases, the difference between these two funds isn’t large enough to justify the tax friction of switching.

“What about VEQT, ZEQT, and FEQT?”

The all-equity ETF space in Canada is getting crowded – and that’s great for investors. Here’s the quick rundown:

• VEQT (Vanguard) – XEQT’s closest competitor, very similar in every way
• ZEQT (BMO) – Same MER as XEQT, smaller AUM
• FEQT (Fidelity) – Factor-based approach with Bitcoin exposure, higher MER
• MEQT (Mackenzie) – What we just covered

For most investors, XEQT or VEQT is the best choice. The others are fine alternatives but don’t offer enough differentiation to justify picking them over the market leaders.

“Does MEQT pay dividends?”

Yes. Like XEQT, MEQT distributes dividends from the underlying stocks it holds. The yield is similar to XEQT’s – typically in the 1.5% to 2.5% range annually, depending on market conditions.

Related Reading

• What is XEQT? A Comprehensive Guide
• XEQT MER: What You’re Really Paying
• XEQT Holdings: What You Actually Own
• XEQT vs ZEQT (BMO): Which All-Equity ETF Wins?
• XEQT vs FEQT (Fidelity): Which All-Equity ETF is Right for You?

Disclosure: This post contains referral links to Wealthsimple. I may receive compensation if you sign up through these links, but this doesn’t affect my honest assessment. I genuinely believe XEQT is the better choice for most Canadian investors, and I hold it in my own portfolio.