Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

MOAT vs MTUM: how they differ

MOAT and MTUM hold 6% of their weight in the same names, and MTUM returned more over the year.

VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, MOAT and MTUM hold 6% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions MOAT and MTUM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingMOATMTUM
Palo Alto Networks Inc2.40%2.40%
Applied Materials Inc1.41%2.87%
Fortinet Inc2.19%0.89%
Amphenol Corp1.31%0.75%
Datadog Inc2.00%0.57%
West Pharmaceutical Services Inc1.56%0.14%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in MOATOnly in MTUM
Veeva Systems Inc 3.41%ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES 5.39%
Airbnb Inc 2.88%MICRON TECHNOLOGY 5.20%
Microsoft Corp 2.79%INTEL CORPORATION 4.14%
Charles Schwab Corp/The 2.75%CISCO SYSTEMS INC 3.48%
Lpl Financial Holdings Inc 2.73%JOHNSON & JOHNSON 3.38%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.58%SANDISK 3.10%
Nvidia Corp 2.58%ALPHABET CLASS A 2.69%
Estee Lauder Cos Inc/The 2.52%EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP 2.69%

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 Sep 10, 2026.

MOAT and MTUM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerVanEckiShares
What it isMorningstar Wide MoatMSCI USA Momentum Factor
Total return, 1 year+11.3%+21.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−6.2 pts+4.3 pts
Expense ratio0.46%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50091.6%98.2%
Holdings55128

MOAT in plain words

MOAT is an index equity fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +11.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.46% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 55 positions, with the top ten at 27.1%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Aug 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

MTUM in plain words

MTUM is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 98% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 128 positions, with the top ten at 35.3%. It sat 11.1% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, MOAT or MTUM?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, MOAT returned +11.3% and MTUM returned +21.8%, so MTUM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, MOAT or MTUM?
MOAT charges 0.46% a year and MTUM charges 0.15%, so MTUM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do MOAT and MTUM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 92% of MOAT and 98% of MTUM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 6% 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.

MOAT against MTUM, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, MOAT against MTUM, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/moat-vs-mtum Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources