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

FNDX vs MGK: how they differ

FNDX and MGK hold 22% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and Vanguard Mega Cap Growth Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and MGK hold 22% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FNDX and MGK both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFNDXMGK
Apple Inc4.64%12.19%
Alphabet Inc2.38%5.93%
Microsoft Corp2.33%7.52%
Alphabet Inc1.90%4.67%
Amazon.com Inc1.86%4.47%
Meta Platforms Inc1.24%4.08%
Intel Corp2.57%1.10%
Broadcom Inc0.65%4.28%
NVIDIA Corp0.55%13.29%
Applied Materials Inc0.47%1.13%
Lam Research Corp0.41%1.93%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc0.39%3.20%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FNDXOnly in MGK
Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29%Palantir Technologies Inc 0.97%
Micron Technology Inc 1.60%Crowdstrike Holdings Inc 0.79%
Chevron Corp 1.49%AppLovin Corp 0.65%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.41%Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.51%
JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.38%Space Exploration Technologies Corp 0.48%
UnitedHealth Group Inc 1.37%Snowflake Inc 0.34%
Walmart Inc 1.01%Interactive Brokers Group Inc 0.29%
Verizon Communications Inc 0.99%

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.

FNDX and MGK on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
MGK
Vanguard Mega Cap Growth Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabVanguard
What it isFundamental U.S. Large CompanyMega Cap Growth
Total return, 1 year+26.1%+14.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+8.6 pts−2.6 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.07%
Already in the S&P 50091.2%99.2%
Holdings73356

FNDX in plain words

FNDX is an index equity fund tracking the Fundamental U.S. Large Company. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +26.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% 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 733 positions, with the top ten at 22.5%.

MGK in plain words

MGK is an index equity fund tracking the Mega Cap Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +14.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 99% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 56 positions, with the top ten at 63.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FNDX or MGK?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and MGK returned +14.9%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FNDX or MGK?
FNDX charges 0.25% a year and MGK charges 0.07%, so MGK is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FNDX and MGK overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 99% of MGK by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 22% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources