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

CGGR vs GRNY: how they differ

CGGR and GRNY hold 28% of their weight in the same names, and GRNY returned more over the year.

Capital Group Growth ETF and Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGGR and GRNY hold 28% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CGGR and GRNY both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCGGRGRNY
Alphabet Inc3.06%2.96%
Broadcom Inc5.40%2.94%
Amazon.com Inc2.69%3.02%
NVIDIA Corp5.16%2.46%
Microsoft Corp4.38%2.38%
Meta Platforms Inc7.09%2.24%
Tesla Inc5.85%2.15%
Netflix Inc1.85%2.82%
Apple Inc1.79%2.40%
KLA Corp1.17%2.75%
General Electric Co1.11%2.04%
Strategy Inc1.03%3.01%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGGROnly in GRNY
Micron Technology Inc 4.86%Advanced Micro Devices Inc 4.17%
Alphabet Inc 3.36%Arista Networks Inc 2.88%
Visa Inc 2.34%Bank of New York Mellon Corp/T 2.59%
TransDigm Group Inc 2.02%Eaton Corp PLC 2.56%
Capital Group Central Cash Fund 1.98%Cadence Design Systems Inc 2.54%
Eli Lilly & Co 1.81%ONEOK Inc 2.49%
Intuitive Surgical Inc 1.68%Air Products and Chemicals Inc 2.48%
Cloudflare Inc 1.65%Chevron Corp 2.46%

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 May 31, 2026.

CGGR and GRNY on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGGR
Capital Group Growth ETF
GRNY
Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitalFundstrat
What it isGrowthFundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap
Total return, 1 year+7.2%+13.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−10.3 pts−3.7 pts
Expense ratio0.39%0.75%
Already in the S&P 50080.6%97.0%
Holdings8940

CGGR in plain words

CGGR is an index equity fund tracking the Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.39% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 81% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 89 positions, with the top ten at 44.2%.

GRNY in plain words

GRNY is an index equity fund tracking the Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +13.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.75% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 40 positions, with the top ten at 30.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGGR or GRNY?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGGR returned +7.2% and GRNY returned +13.8%, so GRNY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGGR or GRNY?
CGGR charges 0.39% a year and GRNY charges 0.75%, so CGGR is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGGR and GRNY overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 81% of CGGR and 97% of GRNY by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 28% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources