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

CGDV vs URTH: how they differ

CGDV and URTH hold 30% of their weight in the same names, and CGDV returned more over the year.

Capital Group Dividend Value ETF and iShares MSCI World ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGDV and URTH hold 30% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CGDV and URTH both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCGDVURTH
NVIDIA Corp5.66%5.64%
Microsoft Corp5.81%3.50%
Alphabet Inc3.60%2.43%
Apple Inc2.36%5.04%
Broadcom Inc5.16%2.21%
Amazon.com Inc1.88%2.86%
Meta Platforms Inc3.33%1.51%
Eli Lilly & Co3.15%0.97%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.90%0.90%
Exxon Mobil Corp1.34%0.67%
Intel Corp1.09%0.57%
Cisco Systems Inc3.02%0.52%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGDVOnly in URTH
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd 2.83%ALPHABET INC. 2.01%
British American Tobacco PLC 2.66%TESLA, INC. 1.35%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 2.17%MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 1.20%
Capital Group Central Cash Fund 2.02%ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 0.92%
Linde PLC 1.95%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 0.72%
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 1.42%ASML Holding N.V. 0.69%
Medtronic PLC 1.07%VISA INC. 0.60%
Smurfit Westrock PLC 1.03%JOHNSON & JOHNSON 0.60%

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 May 31, 2026.

CGDV and URTH on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGDV
Capital Group Dividend Value ETF
URTH
iShares MSCI World ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitaliShares
What it isDividend ValueMSCI World
Total return, 1 year+18.7%+17.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.2 pts−0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.33%0.24%
Already in the S&P 50091.0%70.3%
Holdings531322

CGDV in plain words

CGDV is an index equity fund tracking the Dividend Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 53 positions, with the top ten at 38.8%. It sat 4.0% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

URTH in plain words

URTH is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI World. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 70% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1322 positions, with the top ten at 27.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGDV or URTH?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGDV returned +18.7% and URTH returned +17.4%, so CGDV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGDV or URTH?
CGDV charges 0.33% a year and URTH charges 0.24%, so URTH is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGDV and URTH overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of CGDV and 70% of URTH by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 30% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources