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 XLK: how they differ

CGGR and XLK hold 26% of their weight in the same names, and XLK returned more over the year.

Capital Group Growth ETF and State Street(R) Technology Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGGR and XLK hold 26% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CGGR and XLK both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCGGRXLK
Broadcom Inc5.40%5.41%
NVIDIA Corp5.16%14.66%
Micron Technology Inc4.86%5.42%
Microsoft Corp4.38%8.38%
Apple Inc1.79%12.86%
Intel Corp1.19%3.68%
KLA Corp1.17%2.20%
Amphenol Corp0.85%1.21%
Salesforce Inc0.89%0.71%
AppLovin Corp0.57%0.77%
Coherent Corp0.17%0.43%
Fair Isaac Corp0.80%0.15%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGGROnly in XLK
Meta Platforms Inc 7.09%Advanced Micro Devices Inc 5.28%
Tesla Inc 5.85%Applied Materials Inc 3.20%
Alphabet Inc 3.36%Lam Research Corp 3.02%
Alphabet Inc 3.06%Cisco Systems Inc 2.59%
Amazon.com Inc 2.69%Sandisk Corp 1.88%
Visa Inc 2.34%Palo Alto Networks Inc 1.54%
TransDigm Group Inc 2.02%Texas Instruments Inc 1.51%
Capital Group Central Cash Fund 1.98%Palantir Technologies Inc 1.49%

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 XLK on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGGR
Capital Group Growth ETF
XLK
State Street(R) Technology Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitalState Street
What it isGrowthTechnology
Total return, 1 year+7.2%+39.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−10.3 pts+21.7 pts
Expense ratio0.39%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50080.6%100.0%
Holdings8974

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%.

XLK in plain words

XLK is an index equity fund tracking the Technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +39.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% 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 74 positions, with the top ten at 64.5%. It sat 5.2% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGGR or XLK?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGGR returned +7.2% and XLK returned +39.2%, so XLK returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGGR or XLK?
CGGR charges 0.39% a year and XLK charges 0.08%, so XLK is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGGR and XLK overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 81% of CGGR and 100% of XLK by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 26% 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 XLK, 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 XLK, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CGGR-XLK Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources