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

FTEC vs MGK: how they differ

FTEC and MGK hold 55% of their weight in the same names, and FTEC returned more over the year.

Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF and Vanguard Mega Cap Growth Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FTEC and MGK hold 55% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FTEC and MGK both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFTECMGK
NVIDIA Corp18.00%13.29%
Apple Inc14.38%12.19%
Microsoft Corp9.54%7.52%
Broadcom Inc5.01%4.28%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc2.60%3.20%
Lam Research Corp1.49%1.93%
Applied Materials Inc1.45%1.13%
Intel Corp1.99%1.10%
KLA Corp1.09%1.48%
Palantir Technologies Inc1.40%0.97%
Oracle Corp1.22%0.95%
Amphenol Corp0.86%0.89%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FTECOnly in MGK
Micron Technology Inc 2.64%Alphabet Inc 5.93%
Cisco Systems Inc 1.66%Alphabet Inc 4.67%
Texas Instruments Inc 1.20%Amazon.com Inc 4.47%
International Business Machines Corp 0.99%Meta Platforms Inc 4.08%
Analog Devices Inc 0.95%Tesla Inc 3.93%
QUALCOMM Inc 0.92%Eli Lilly & Co 3.41%
Salesforce Inc 0.77%Visa Inc 1.82%
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.76%Mastercard Inc 1.47%

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 Jun 30, 2026.

FTEC and MGK on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FTEC
Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF
MGK
Vanguard Mega Cap Growth Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFidelityVanguard
What it isMSCI Information TechnologyMega Cap Growth
Total return, 1 year+35.7%+14.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+18.2 pts−2.6 pts
Expense ratio0.08%0.07%
Already in the S&P 50086.2%99.2%
Holdings28256

FTEC in plain words

FTEC is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI Information Technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +35.7% 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 Apr 30, 2026, 86% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 282 positions, with the top ten at 58.8%. It sat 3.7% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

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, FTEC or MGK?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FTEC returned +35.7% and MGK returned +14.9%, so FTEC returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FTEC or MGK?
FTEC charges 0.08% a year and MGK charges 0.07%, so MGK is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FTEC and MGK overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 86% of FTEC and 99% of MGK by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 55% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources