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 VOOG: how they differ

CGDV and VOOG hold 38% of their weight in the same names, and CGDV returned more over the year.

Capital Group Dividend Value ETF and Vanguard S&P 500 Growth Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGDV and VOOG hold 38% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CGDV and VOOG both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCGDVVOOG
Microsoft Corp5.81%9.31%
NVIDIA Corp5.66%14.29%
Broadcom Inc5.16%5.90%
Alphabet Inc3.60%6.17%
Meta Platforms Inc3.33%3.85%
Eli Lilly & Co3.15%2.44%
Apple Inc2.36%6.38%
Amazon.com Inc1.88%3.90%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.90%1.43%
Applied Materials Inc3.12%0.99%
Mastercard Inc1.30%0.75%
Cisco Systems Inc3.02%0.70%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGDVOnly in VOOG
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd 2.83%Alphabet Inc 4.90%
British American Tobacco PLC 2.66%Micron Technology Inc 3.04%
Carrier Global Corp 2.64%Berkshire Hathaway Inc 2.42%
Starbucks Corp 2.26%Advanced Micro Devices Inc 2.34%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 2.17%Tesla Inc 2.12%
Union Pacific Corp 2.12%Caterpillar Inc 1.14%
UnitedHealth Group Inc 2.03%Lam Research Corp 1.11%
Capital Group Central Cash Fund 2.02%Netflix Inc 1.01%

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 VOOG on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGDV
Capital Group Dividend Value ETF
VOOG
Vanguard S&P 500 Growth Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitalVanguard
What it isDividend ValueS&P 500 Growth
Total return, 1 year+18.7%+17.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.2 pts+0.3 pts
Expense ratio0.33%0.05%
Already in the S&P 50091.0%100.0%
Holdings53146

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.

VOOG in plain words

VOOG is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.05% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 146 positions, with the top ten at 60.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGDV or VOOG?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGDV returned +18.7% and VOOG returned +17.8%, so CGDV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGDV or VOOG?
CGDV charges 0.33% a year and VOOG charges 0.05%, so VOOG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGDV and VOOG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of CGDV and 100% of VOOG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 38% 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 VOOG, 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 VOOG, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CGDV-VOOG Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources