Data as of Sep 4, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

CIBR vs VOO

First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF and Vanguard 500 Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CIBR and VOO hold 9% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CIBR and VOO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCIBRVOO
Broadcom Inc.6.04%2.78%
Microsoft Corporation2.09%4.31%
Alphabet Inc. (Class A)1.68%3.26%
Cisco Systems, Inc.6.84%0.72%
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.8.92%0.43%
International Business Machines Corporat1.49%0.41%
CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (Class A)8.79%0.30%
Arista Networks, Inc.2.29%0.27%
Fortinet, Inc.8.54%0.15%
Datadog, Inc. (Class A)1.62%0.13%
Accenture plc1.88%0.12%
NetApp, Inc.2.01%0.05%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CIBROnly in VOO
Cloudflare, Inc. (Class A) 4.35%NVIDIA Corp 7.53%
Okta, Inc. 4.17%Apple Inc 6.61%
Zscaler, Inc. 3.47%Amazon.com Inc 3.63%
Rubrik, Inc. (Class A) 2.95%Alphabet Inc 2.60%
Dynatrace, Inc. 2.30%Micron Technology Inc 2.02%
Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. 2.12%Meta Platforms Inc 1.92%
JFrog Ltd. 2.00%Tesla Inc 1.84%
Thales S.A. 1.83%Eli Lilly & Co 1.48%

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 as filed for Jun 30, 2026 and Sep 4, 2026.

CIBR and VOO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CIBR
First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF
VOO
Vanguard 500 Index Fund
Where it sitsThemes deskCore fund
IssuerFirst TrustVanguard
What it isCybersecurityS&P 500
Total return, 1 year+31.4%+20.1%
S&P 500 over the same days+20.0%+20.0%
Gap to the S&P 500+11.5 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.58%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50061.9%100.0%
Holdings43506

CIBR in plain words

By weight, 62% of CIBR's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 91%. The top ten holdings are 57% of the fund across 43 positions, as filed for Sep 3, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +31.4% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 11.5 pts. It sits 7.5% below its all-time high of Aug 13, 2026.

VOO in plain words

VOO is a index equity fund tracking S&P 500. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 it returned +20.1% with distributions reinvested, against +20.0% for the S&P 500 and +25.6% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% 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 506 positions, with the top ten at 36.5%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CIBR or VOO?
In the year to Sep 4, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CIBR returned +31.4% and VOO returned +20.1%, so CIBR returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CIBR or VOO?
CIBR charges 0.58% a year and VOO charges 0.03%, so VOO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CIBR and VOO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 62% of CIBR and 100% of VOO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 9% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
Are CIBR and VOO the same kind of fund?
No. CIBR is a thematic ETF and VOO is an index ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.

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.

CIBR against VOO, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 4, 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, CIBR against VOO, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CIBR-VOO.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources