Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
CGDV vs OAKM: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, CGDV returned +15.8% to OAKM's +14.4%; 8% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about CGDV and OAKM
Net assets: $39.1bn on Oct 27, 2026 for Capital Group Dividend Value ETF, and $1.0bn on Jun 30, 2026 for Oakmark U.S. Large Cap ETF.
Pair scorecard
CGDV costs 0.26 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 1.4 points.
| Measure | CGDV | OAKM |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +15.8% | +14.4% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 3.6%, high on Aug 13, 2026 | 3.6%, high on Sep 3, 2026 |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | No index, actively managed |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.59% |
| Net assets, CGDV as of Oct 27, 2026 and OAKM as of Jun 30, 2026 | $39.1bn | $1.0bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 8% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 42.0% | 37.0% |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026. Method
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, CGDV and OAKM hold 8% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026.
half
8% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
CGDV and OAKM on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGDV and OAKM are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- Holdings in common. 8% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026).
- Cost. CGDV charges 0.33% of assets a year and OAKM 0.59%, a gap of 0.26 points.
- What each follows (similar). Both follow No index, actively managed.
Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +15.8% with distributions reinvested, against +27.5% for its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Value Index.
CGDV is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Aug 31, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 53 positions, with the top ten at 42.0%. It sat 3.6% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +14.4% with distributions reinvested, against +27.5% for its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Value Index.
OAKM is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.59% 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 39 positions, with the top ten at 37.0%. It sat 3.6% below its high of Sep 3, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGDV or OAKM?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGDV returned +15.8% and OAKM +14.4%.
- Which is cheaper, CGDV or OAKM?
- CGDV is cheaper, by 0.26 percentage points a year. That is about $26 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, CGDV against OAKM, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgdv-vs-oakm
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). CGDV against OAKM. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgdv-vs-oakm
[CGDV against OAKM (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgdv-vs-oakm)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.