Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or IWC?

In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +9.9% and IWC returned +31.3%, so IWC returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

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 IWC: how they differ

CGBL and IWC are both equity index funds, and over the year IWC returned more, +31.3% against +9.9%.

Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and iShares Micro-Cap ETF.

CGBL and IWC on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	IWC iShares Micro-Cap ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	Capital	iShares
What it is	Core Balanced	Russell Microcap
Total return, 1 year	+9.9%	+31.3%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−7.6 pts	+13.8 pts
Expense ratio	0.33%	not published
Holdings	77	not filed

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%.

IWC in plain words

IWC is an index equity fund tracking the Russell Microcap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +31.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. It sat 5.0% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or IWC?: In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +9.9% and IWC returned +31.3%, so IWC returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources