Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
CGBL vs FTEC: how they differ
CGBL and FTEC hold 15% of their weight in the same names, and FTEC returned more over the year.
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and FTEC hold 15% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | CGBL | FTEC |
|---|---|---|
| Broadcom Inc | 4.57% | 5.01% |
| Micron Technology Inc | 2.23% | 2.64% |
| Apple Inc | 2.00% | 14.38% |
| Microsoft Corp | 1.96% | 9.54% |
| NVIDIA Corp | 1.19% | 18.00% |
| KLA Corp | 1.08% | 1.09% |
| Intel Corp | 0.91% | 1.99% |
| International Business Machines Corp | 0.41% | 0.99% |
| Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co | 0.33% | 0.26% |
| Strategy Inc | 0.13% | 0.22% |
| Only in CGBL | Only in FTEC |
|---|---|
| Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.22% | Advanced Micro Devices Inc 2.60% |
| Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.60% | Cisco Systems Inc 1.66% |
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.48% | Lam Research Corp 1.49% |
| Alphabet Inc 2.78% | Applied Materials Inc 1.45% |
| Philip Morris International Inc 2.07% | Palantir Technologies Inc 1.40% |
| GE Vernova Inc 1.25% | Oracle Corp 1.22% |
| ATI Inc 1.23% | Texas Instruments Inc 1.20% |
| Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc 1.20% | Analog Devices Inc 0.95% |
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 Capital Group Core Balanced ETF | FTEC Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Capital | Fidelity |
| What it is | Core Balanced | MSCI Information Technology |
| Total return, 1 year | +9.9% | +35.7% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −7.6 pts | +18.2 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.08% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 48.1% | 86.2% |
| Holdings | 77 | 282 |
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%.
FTEC in plain words
FTEC is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI Information Technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +35.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 86% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 282 positions, with the top ten at 58.8%. It sat 3.7% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or FTEC?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +9.9% and FTEC returned +35.7%, so FTEC returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, CGBL or FTEC?
- CGBL charges 0.33% a year and FTEC charges 0.08%, so FTEC is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do CGBL and FTEC overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 48% of CGBL and 86% of FTEC by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 15% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, CGBL against FTEC, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CGBL-FTEC Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources