Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
CGGR vs QLC: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, CGGR returned +2.6% to QLC's +15.2%; 34% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about CGGR and QLC
Net assets: $25.9bn on Oct 27, 2026 for Capital Group Growth ETF, and $1.0bn on Jul 31, 2026 for Northern Trust US Quality Large Cap ETF.
Pair scorecard
QLC costs 0.14 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 12.6 points.
| Measure | CGGR | QLC |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +2.6% | +15.2% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 3.4%, high on Oct 6, 2026 | |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.39% | 0.25% |
| Net assets, CGGR as of Oct 27, 2026 and QLC as of Jul 31, 2026 | $25.9bn | $1.0bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 34% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 39.7% | 37.6% |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026. Method
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, CGGR and QLC hold 34% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026.
half
34% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
CGGR and QLC on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGGR and QLC are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- What each follows. CGGR follows No index, actively managed and QLC follows Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index.
- Holdings in common. 34% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026).
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 CGGR returned +2.6% and QLC +15.2% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 12.6 points.
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.
CGGR
CGGR is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +2.6% with distributions reinvested, against +13.7% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.39% a year. By its holdings filed for Aug 31, 2026, 78% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 96 positions, with the top ten at 39.7%. It sat 3.4% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
QLC
QLC tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +15.2% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for Jul 31, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 177 positions, with the top ten at 37.6%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGGR or QLC?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGGR returned +2.6% and QLC +15.2%.
- Which is cheaper, CGGR or QLC?
- QLC is cheaper, by 0.14 percentage points a year. That is about $14 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, CGGR against QLC, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-qlc
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). CGGR against QLC. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-qlc
[CGGR against QLC (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-qlc)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.