Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
CGBL vs IEFA: how they differ
CGBL and IEFA hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and IEFA returned more over the year.
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and IEFA hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in CGBL | Only in IEFA |
|---|---|
| Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.22% | ASML HOLDING 2.62% |
| Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.60% | HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.40% |
| Broadcom Inc 4.57% | ROCHE PS PAR AG 1.18% |
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.48% | SHELL PLC 1.09% |
| Alphabet Inc 2.78% | MITSUBISHI UFJ FINANCIAL GROUP 1.00% |
| Micron Technology Inc 2.23% | NOVARTIS AG 0.99% |
| Philip Morris International Inc 2.07% | NESTLE SA 0.97% |
| Apple Inc 2.00% | ASTRAZENECA PLC 0.94% |
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 Sep 10, 2026.
| CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF | IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Capital Group | iShares |
| What it is | Core Balanced | Core MSCI EAFE |
| Total return, 1 year | +9.9% | +18.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −7.6 pts | +0.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.07% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 48.1% | 0.1% |
| Holdings | 77 | 1650 |
CGBL in plain words
CGBL is an index equity fund tracking the Core Balanced. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 48% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 77 positions, with the top ten at 59.2%.
IEFA in plain words
IEFA is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI EAFE. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1650 positions, with the top ten at 12.0%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or IEFA?
- In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +9.9% and IEFA returned +18.0%, so IEFA returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, CGBL or IEFA?
- CGBL charges 0.33% a year and IEFA charges 0.07%, so IEFA is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do CGBL and IEFA overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 48% of CGBL and 0% of IEFA by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 0% 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, CGBL against IEFA, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-iefa Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources