Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
MOAT vs QUAL: how they differ
MOAT and QUAL hold 12% of their weight in the same names, and QUAL returned more over the year.
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF and iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, MOAT and QUAL hold 12% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | MOAT | QUAL |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corp | 2.45% | 6.52% |
| Applied Materials Inc | 2.34% | 2.45% |
| Microsoft Corp | 2.20% | 5.05% |
| Meta Platforms Inc | 1.17% | 3.50% |
| Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc | 1.42% | 1.02% |
| NIKE Inc | 2.02% | 0.93% |
| Fortinet Inc | 2.21% | 0.76% |
| Motorola Solutions Inc | 1.24% | 0.48% |
| PepsiCo Inc | 1.17% | 0.46% |
| Zoetis Inc | 1.82% | 0.22% |
| Veeva Systems Inc | 2.41% | 0.08% |
| CoStar Group Inc | 0.71% | 0.07% |
| Only in MOAT | Only in QUAL |
|---|---|
| Masco Corp 2.96% | APPLE INC. 6.28% |
| Kenvue Inc 2.59% | LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION 3.23% |
| Airbnb Inc 2.56% | THE TJX COMPANIES, INC. 3.19% |
| Palo Alto Networks Inc 2.51% | VISA INC. 3.09% |
| Brown-Forman Corp 2.49% | ELI LILLY AND COMPANY 2.92% |
| Charles Schwab Corp/The 2.45% | KLA CORPORATION 2.79% |
| Datadog Inc 2.44% | ALPHABET INC. 2.54% |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.43% | CATERPILLAR INC. 2.52% |
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.
| MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF | QUAL iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | VanEck | iShares |
| What it is | Morningstar Wide Moat | MSCI USA Quality Factor |
| Total return, 1 year | +11.3% | +16.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −6.2 pts | −1.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.46% | 0.15% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 91.6% | 98.9% |
| Holdings | 55 | 121 |
MOAT in plain words
MOAT is an index equity fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +11.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.46% 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 55 positions, with the top ten at 25.3%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Aug 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
QUAL in plain words
QUAL is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Quality Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.0% 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, 99% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 121 positions, with the top ten at 39.1%. It sat 3.1% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, MOAT or QUAL?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, MOAT returned +11.3% and QUAL returned +16.0%, so QUAL returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, MOAT or QUAL?
- MOAT charges 0.46% a year and QUAL charges 0.15%, so QUAL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do MOAT and QUAL overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 92% of MOAT and 99% of QUAL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 12% 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, MOAT against QUAL, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/MOAT-QUAL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources