Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IGM vs VGT: how they differ
IGM and VGT hold 70% of their weight in the same names, and VGT returned more over the year.
iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF and Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IGM and VGT hold 70% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IGM | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corp. | 7.97% | 16.85% |
| Apple, Inc. | 7.92% | 14.59% |
| Microsoft Corp. | 7.50% | 9.47% |
| Broadcom, Inc. | 7.61% | 4.21% |
| Micron Technology, Inc. | 5.47% | 4.21% |
| Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | 4.13% | 3.21% |
| Intel Corp. | 2.88% | 2.03% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | 2.02% | 1.85% |
| Lam Research Corp. | 2.37% | 1.56% |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | 2.50% | 1.40% |
| Palantir Technologies, Inc. | 1.17% | 1.35% |
| Texas Instruments, Inc. | 1.18% | 1.11% |
| Only in IGM | Only in VGT |
|---|---|
| Alphabet, Inc. 4.45% | Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.81% |
| Meta Platforms, Inc. 4.17% | Accenture PLC 0.47% |
| Alphabet, Inc. 3.55% | NXP Semiconductors NV 0.38% |
| Netflix, Inc. 1.31% | Flex Ltd 0.31% |
| Seagate Technology Holdings plc 0.94% | TE Connectivity PLC 0.28% |
| Shopify, Inc. 0.61% | Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd 0.22% |
| Accenture plc 0.33% | Fabrinet 0.14% |
| NXP Semiconductors NV 0.31% | JFrog Ltd 0.11% |
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.
| IGM iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF | VGT Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Vanguard |
| What it is | Expanded Tech Sector | Information technology |
| Total return, 1 year | +32.7% | +35.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +15.2 pts | +17.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.37% | 0.09% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 92.0% | 86.9% |
| Holdings | 295 | 317 |
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.
VGT in plain words
VGT is an index equity fund tracking the Information technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +35.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 317 positions, with the top ten at 59.5%. It sat 3.6% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IGM or VGT?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IGM returned +32.7% and VGT returned +35.4%, so VGT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IGM or VGT?
- IGM charges 0.37% a year and VGT charges 0.09%, so VGT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IGM and VGT overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 92% of IGM and 87% of VGT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 70% 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 VGT, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IGM-VGT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources