Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IGM vs SPHQ: how they differ
IGM and SPHQ hold 17% of their weight in the same names, and IGM returned more over the year.
iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF and Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IGM and SPHQ hold 17% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IGM | SPHQ |
|---|---|---|
| Apple, Inc. | 7.92% | 4.51% |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | 2.50% | 2.80% |
| Lam Research Corp. | 2.37% | 4.10% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | 2.02% | 3.54% |
| KLA Corp. | 1.72% | 3.27% |
| Western Digital Corp. | 0.96% | 2.15% |
| QUALCOMM, Inc. | 0.85% | 2.03% |
| AppLovin Corp. | 0.60% | 1.56% |
| Fortinet, Inc. | 0.42% | 0.85% |
| Adobe, Inc. | 0.36% | 1.45% |
| Motorola Solutions, Inc. | 0.30% | 0.74% |
| Electronic Arts, Inc. | 0.20% | 0.45% |
| Only in IGM | Only in SPHQ |
|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corp. 7.97% | Costco Wholesale Corp. 4.82% |
| Broadcom, Inc. 7.61% | Visa Inc. 4.69% |
| Microsoft Corp. 7.50% | Mastercard Inc. 4.32% |
| Micron Technology, Inc. 5.47% | General Electric Co. 4.16% |
| Alphabet, Inc. 4.45% | Caterpillar Inc. 3.78% |
| Meta Platforms, Inc. 4.17% | Procter & Gamble Co. (The) 3.46% |
| Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 4.13% | Coca-Cola Co. (The) 3.34% |
| Alphabet, Inc. 3.55% | GE Vernova Inc. 3.15% |
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.
| IGM iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF | SPHQ Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Invesco |
| What it is | Expanded Tech Sector | S&P 500 Quality |
| Total return, 1 year | +32.7% | +17.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +15.2 pts | −0.1 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.37% | 0.15% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 92.0% | 99.9% |
| Holdings | 295 | 99 |
IGM in plain words
IGM is an index equity fund tracking the Expanded Tech Sector. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +32.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.37% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 295 positions, with the top ten at 55.7%. It sat 5.1% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
SPHQ in plain words
SPHQ is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 99 positions, with the top ten at 40.7%. It sat 6.1% below its high of Jun 30, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IGM or SPHQ?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IGM returned +32.7% and SPHQ returned +17.4%, so IGM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IGM or SPHQ?
- IGM charges 0.37% a year and SPHQ charges 0.15%, so SPHQ is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IGM and SPHQ overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 92% of IGM and 100% of SPHQ by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 17% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IGM against SPHQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IGM-SPHQ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources