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 SPYG: how they differ

CGGR and SPYG hold 46% of their weight in the same names, and SPYG returned more over the year.

Capital Group Growth ETF and State Street(R) SPDR(R) Portfolio S&P 500(R) Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGGR and SPYG hold 46% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CGGR and SPYG both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCGGRSPYG
NVIDIA Corp5.16%13.66%
Broadcom Inc5.40%5.04%
Microsoft Corp4.38%7.81%
Micron Technology Inc4.86%3.67%
Meta Platforms Inc7.09%3.49%
Alphabet Inc3.36%4.71%
Alphabet Inc3.06%5.91%
Amazon.com Inc2.69%3.48%
Tesla Inc5.85%2.07%
Eli Lilly & Co1.81%2.67%
Apple Inc1.79%5.99%
KLA Corp1.17%1.11%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGGROnly in SPYG
Capital Group Central Cash Fund 1.98%Advanced Micro Devices Inc 2.67%
Cloudflare Inc 1.65%Berkshire Hathaway Inc 2.58%
Shopify Inc 1.63%JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.68%
SK hynix Inc 1.62%Applied Materials Inc 1.62%
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc 1.56%Lam Research Corp 1.53%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 1.48%Johnson & Johnson 1.02%
Intel Corp 1.19%Sandisk Corp 0.95%
Bank of America Corp 1.05%Palantir Technologies Inc 0.75%

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 Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

CGGR and SPYG on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGGR
Capital Group Growth ETF
SPYG
State Street(R) SPDR(R) Portfolio S&P 500(R) Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitalState Street
What it isGrowthSPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth
Total return, 1 year+7.2%+17.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−10.3 pts+0.4 pts
Expense ratio0.39%0.04%
Already in the S&P 50080.6%100.0%
Holdings89147

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%.

SPYG in plain words

SPYG is an index equity fund tracking the SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 147 positions, with the top ten at 56.4%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGGR or SPYG?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGGR returned +7.2% and SPYG returned +17.9%, so SPYG returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGGR or SPYG?
CGGR charges 0.39% a year and SPYG charges 0.04%, so SPYG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGGR and SPYG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 81% of CGGR and 100% of SPYG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 46% 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 SPYG, 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 SPYG, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CGGR-SPYG Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources