CGGR vs PWRD: Differences, Returns & Fees
CGGR and PWRD hold 11% of their weight in the same names, and CGGR returned +5.8% over the year. Net assets: $26.0bn on Oct 19, 2026 for Capital Group Growth ETF, and $1.5bn on Jul 31, 2026 for TCW Transform Systems ETF.
CGGR costs 0.36 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 7.0 points.
| CGGR | PWRD | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.39% | 0.75% |
| Net assets, CGGR as of Oct 19, 2026 and PWRD as of Jul 31, 2026 | $26.0bn | $1.5bn |
| Total return, 1 year | +5.8% | −1.2% |
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | No index, actively managed |
| Holdings in common | 11% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 44.2% | 52.0% |
| Below its high | 20.1%, high on Jun 30, 2026 | |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026.
CGGR and PWRD are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- Holdings in common. 11% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026).
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 20, 2026 CGGR returned +5.8% and PWRD −1.2% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 7.0 points.
- Cost. CGGR charges 0.39% of assets a year and PWRD 0.75%, a gap of 0.36 points.
Data as of Oct 20, 2026. The differences are picked by a fixed rule, in a fixed order; the PDF prints it. Page 2 has the returns, overlap, risks and sources.
Take this comparison to a client
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Not advice. The brief uses the figures on this page, with the data date and a report id. Saved comparisons are listed on your saved page; privacy.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CGGR and PWRD hold 11% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026.
half
11% in common
On the same fields
CGGR and PWRD on the fields both publish, as of Oct 20, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
About CGGR
CGGR is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +5.8% with distributions reinvested, against +15.9% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.39% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 81% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 89 positions, with the top ten at 44.2%.
About PWRD
PWRD is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned −1.2% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.75% a year. By its holdings filed for Jul 31, 2026, 57% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 31 positions, with the top ten at 52.0%. It sat 20.1% below its high of Jun 30, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGGR or PWRD?
- In the year to Oct 20, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGGR returned +5.8% and PWRD −1.2%.
- Which is cheaper, CGGR or PWRD?
- CGGR is cheaper, by 0.36 percentage points a year. That is about $36 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. 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, CGGR against PWRD, data as of Oct 20, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-pwrd
ETFIQ. (Oct 20, 2026). CGGR against PWRD. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-pwrd
[CGGR against PWRD (ETFIQ, Oct 20, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-pwrd)
Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.