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

AVLV vs CGBL: how they differ

AVLV and CGBL hold 14% of their weight in the same names, and AVLV returned more over the year.

Avantis U.S. Large Cap Value ETF and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, AVLV and CGBL hold 14% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions AVLV and CGBL both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingAVLVCGBL
Micron Technology Inc4.57%2.23%
Apple Inc3.17%2.00%
Microsoft Corp1.63%1.96%
Meta Platforms Inc2.74%1.10%
KLA Corp0.93%1.08%
Deere & Co0.95%0.88%
Amazon.com Inc3.18%0.81%
Union Pacific Corp1.53%0.79%
Gilead Sciences Inc1.29%0.74%
Comcast Corp0.75%0.65%
Caterpillar Inc2.53%0.58%
ConocoPhillips1.17%0.46%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in AVLVOnly in CGBL
Exxon Mobil Corp 2.59%Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.22%
Lam Research Corp 2.52%Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.60%
Merck & Co Inc 1.75%Broadcom Inc 4.57%
Verizon Communications Inc 1.64%Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.48%
TJX Cos Inc/The 1.52%Philip Morris International Inc 2.07%
Morgan Stanley 1.37%GE Vernova Inc 1.25%
General Motors Co 1.11%Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc 1.20%
Flex Ltd 1.06%NVIDIA Corp 1.19%

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 Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

AVLV and CGBL on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
AVLV
Avantis U.S. Large Cap Value ETF
CGBL
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerAvantisCapital
What it isU.S. Large Cap ValueCore Balanced
Total return, 1 year+31.0%+9.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+13.5 pts−7.6 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.33%
Already in the S&P 50084.5%48.1%
Holdings27577

AVLV in plain words

AVLV is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Large Cap Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +31.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 84% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 275 positions, with the top ten at 26.9%.

CGBL in plain words

CGBL is an index equity fund tracking the Core Balanced. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 48% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 77 positions, with the top ten at 59.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, AVLV or CGBL?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, AVLV returned +31.0% and CGBL returned +9.9%, so AVLV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, AVLV or CGBL?
AVLV charges 0.15% a year and CGBL charges 0.33%, so AVLV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do AVLV and CGBL overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 84% of AVLV and 48% of CGBL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 14% 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.

AVLV against CGBL, 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, AVLV against CGBL, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/AVLV-CGBL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources