Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

ACWI vs SPHQ: how they differ

ACWI and SPHQ hold 13% of their weight in the same names, and ACWI returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF and Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ACWI and SPHQ hold 13% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ACWI and SPHQ both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingACWISPHQ
APPLE INC.4.02%4.51%
VISA INC.0.56%4.69%
COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION0.45%4.82%
MASTERCARD INCORPORATED0.43%4.32%
CATERPILLAR INC.0.42%3.78%
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.0.36%3.54%
THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY0.35%3.46%
LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION0.33%4.10%
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY0.33%3.34%
APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.0.32%2.80%
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY0.31%4.16%
GE VERNOVA INC.0.30%3.15%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ACWIOnly in SPHQ
NVIDIA CORPORATION 4.89%Ralph Lauren Corp. 0.15%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 2.90%Generac Holdings Inc. 0.13%
AMAZON.COM, INC. 2.58%Revvity, Inc. 0.11%
ALPHABET INC. 2.26%Skyworks Solutions, Inc. 0.10%
BROADCOM INC. 1.90%Bio-Techne Corp. 0.09%
ALPHABET INC. 1.87%FactSet Research Systems Inc. 0.08%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa 1.73%Pool Corp. 0.08%
META PLATFORMS, INC. 1.34%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026.

ACWI and SPHQ on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
SPHQ
Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesInvesco
What it isMSCI ACWIS&P 500 Quality
Total return, 1 year+19.1%+17.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.6 pts−0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.32%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50061.4%99.9%
Holdings230799

ACWI in plain words

ACWI is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI ACWI. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.32% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 61% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2307 positions, with the top ten at 24.6%.

SPHQ in plain words

SPHQ is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 99 positions, with the top ten at 40.7%. It sat 6.1% below its high of Jun 30, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ACWI or SPHQ?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ACWI returned +19.1% and SPHQ returned +17.4%, so ACWI returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ACWI or SPHQ?
ACWI charges 0.32% a year and SPHQ charges 0.15%, so SPHQ is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ACWI and SPHQ overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 61% of ACWI and 100% of SPHQ by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 13% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

ACWI against SPHQ, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACWI against SPHQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ACWI-SPHQ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources