Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
MOAT vs XLK: how they differ
MOAT and XLK hold 14% of their weight in the same names, and XLK returned more over the year.
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF and State Street(R) Technology Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, MOAT and XLK hold 14% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | MOAT | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corp | 2.45% | 14.66% |
| Broadcom Inc | 2.43% | 5.41% |
| Applied Materials Inc | 2.34% | 3.20% |
| Microsoft Corp | 2.20% | 8.38% |
| Palo Alto Networks Inc | 2.51% | 1.54% |
| Amphenol Corp | 1.50% | 1.21% |
| Fortinet Inc | 2.21% | 0.53% |
| Datadog Inc | 2.44% | 0.48% |
| NXP Semiconductors NV | 1.60% | 0.40% |
| Motorola Solutions Inc | 1.24% | 0.38% |
| Fair Isaac Corp | 2.14% | 0.15% |
| Tyler Technologies Inc | 2.15% | 0.07% |
| Only in MOAT | Only in XLK |
|---|---|
| Masco Corp 2.96% | Apple Inc 12.86% |
| Kenvue Inc 2.59% | Micron Technology Inc 5.42% |
| Airbnb Inc 2.56% | Advanced Micro Devices Inc 5.28% |
| Brown-Forman Corp 2.49% | Intel Corp 3.68% |
| Charles Schwab Corp/The 2.45% | Lam Research Corp 3.02% |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.43% | Cisco Systems Inc 2.59% |
| Danaher Corp 2.41% | KLA Corp 2.20% |
| Veeva Systems Inc 2.41% | Sandisk Corp 1.88% |
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.
| MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF | XLK State Street(R) Technology Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | VanEck | State Street |
| What it is | Morningstar Wide Moat | Technology |
| Total return, 1 year | +11.3% | +39.2% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −6.2 pts | +21.7 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.46% | 0.08% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 91.6% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 55 | 74 |
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.
XLK in plain words
XLK is an index equity fund tracking the Technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +39.2% 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 Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 74 positions, with the top ten at 64.5%. It sat 5.2% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, MOAT or XLK?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, MOAT returned +11.3% and XLK returned +39.2%, so XLK returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, MOAT or XLK?
- MOAT charges 0.46% a year and XLK charges 0.08%, so XLK is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do MOAT and XLK overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 92% of MOAT and 100% of XLK by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 14% 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 XLK, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/MOAT-XLK Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources