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

CGBL vs EFA: how they differ

CGBL and EFA hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and EFA returned more over the year.

Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and EFA hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGBLOnly in EFA
Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.22%ASML Holding N.V. 2.60%
Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.60%HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.47%
Broadcom Inc 4.57%ASTRAZENECA PLC 1.36%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.48%Novartis AG 1.30%
Alphabet Inc 2.78%Nestle S.A. 1.21%
Micron Technology Inc 2.23%SHELL PLC 1.20%
Philip Morris International Inc 2.07%Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 1.05%
Apple Inc 2.00%COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA 0.98%

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.

CGBL and EFA on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGBL
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
EFA
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitaliShares
What it isCore BalancedDeveloped markets ex US
Total return, 1 year+9.9%+18.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−7.6 pts+0.7 pts
Expense ratio0.33%0.32%
Already in the S&P 50048.1%0.0%
Holdings77705

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%.

EFA in plain words

EFA is an index equity fund tracking the Developed markets ex US. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.2% 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, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 705 positions, with the top ten at 13.4%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or EFA?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +9.9% and EFA returned +18.2%, so EFA returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGBL or EFA?
CGBL charges 0.33% a year and EFA charges 0.32%, so EFA is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGBL and EFA overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 48% of CGBL and 0% of EFA by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 0% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources