Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
CGGR vs QLTY: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, CGGR returned +2.6% to QLTY's +16.6%; 34% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about CGGR and QLTY
Net assets: $25.9bn on Oct 27, 2026 for Capital Group Growth ETF, and $4.5bn on May 31, 2026 for GMO U.S. Quality ETF.
Pair scorecard
CGGR costs 0.11 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 14.0 points.
| Measure | CGGR | QLTY |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +2.6% | +16.6% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 3.4%, high on Oct 6, 2026 | |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | No index, actively managed |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.39% | 0.50% |
| Net assets, CGGR as of Oct 27, 2026 and QLTY as of May 31, 2026 | $25.9bn | $4.5bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 34% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 39.7% | 48.9% |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026. Method
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, CGGR and QLTY hold 34% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026.
half
34% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
CGGR and QLTY on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGGR and QLTY are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- Holdings in common. 34% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and May 31, 2026).
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 CGGR returned +2.6% and QLTY +16.6% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 14.0 points.
- Cost. CGGR charges 0.39% of assets a year and QLTY 0.50%, a gap of 0.11 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.
QLTY
QLTY is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +16.6% with distributions reinvested, against +13.7% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.50% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 41 positions, with the top ten at 48.9%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGGR or QLTY?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGGR returned +2.6% and QLTY +16.6%.
- Which is cheaper, CGGR or QLTY?
- CGGR is cheaper, by 0.11 percentage points a year. That is about $11 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 QLTY, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-qlty
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). CGGR against QLTY. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-qlty
[CGGR against QLTY (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cggr-vs-qlty)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.