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 VO: how they differ

ACWI and VO hold 11% of their weight in the same names, and ACWI returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF and Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ACWI and VO hold 11% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ACWI and VO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingACWIVO
WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION0.15%1.07%
SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PUBLIC LIMIT0.15%1.05%
NEWMONT CORPORATION0.12%0.48%
VERTIV HOLDINGS CO0.12%1.23%
QUANTA SERVICES, INC.0.11%1.05%
CONSTELLATION ENERGY CORPORATION.0.10%0.78%
CUMMINS INC.0.10%0.95%
HOWMET AEROSPACE INC.0.09%1.04%
THE WILLIAMS COMPANIES, INC.0.09%0.44%
FEDEX CORPORATION0.09%0.33%
JOHNSON CONTROLS INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC LI0.09%0.43%
SLB N.V.0.08%0.67%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ACWIOnly in VO
NVIDIA CORPORATION 4.89%Carnival Corp Ltd 0.35%
APPLE INC. 4.02%Southwest Airlines Co 0.24%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 2.90%Medline Inc 0.15%
AMAZON.COM, INC. 2.58%Cerebras Systems Inc 0.06%
ALPHABET INC. 2.26%TKO Group Holdings Inc 0.06%
BROADCOM INC. 1.90%Symbotic Inc 0.01%
ALPHABET INC. 1.87%Venture Global Inc 0.01%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa 1.73%Lennar Corp 0.01%

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 and Jun 30, 2026.

ACWI and VO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanguard
What it isMSCI ACWIMid-Cap
Total return, 1 year+19.1%+12.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.6 pts−5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.32%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50061.4%91.4%
Holdings2307282

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%.

VO in plain words

VO is an index equity fund tracking the Mid-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 282 positions, with the top ten at 9.6%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ACWI or VO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ACWI returned +19.1% and VO returned +12.0%, so ACWI returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ACWI or VO?
ACWI charges 0.32% a year and VO charges 0.03%, so VO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ACWI and VO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 61% of ACWI and 91% of VO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 11% 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 VO, 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 VO, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ACWI-VO Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources