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 URTH: how they differ

MOAT and URTH hold 13% of their weight in the same names, and URTH returned more over the year.

VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF and iShares MSCI World ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, MOAT and URTH hold 13% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions MOAT and URTH both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingMOATURTH
Microsoft Corp2.79%3.82%
Nvidia Corp2.58%5.52%
Broadcom Inc2.23%1.79%
Amazon.Com Inc1.36%2.67%
Meta Platforms Inc1.29%1.56%
Applied Materials Inc1.41%0.40%
Palo Alto Networks Inc2.40%0.30%
Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc1.36%0.25%
Amphenol Corp1.31%0.22%
Pepsico Inc1.14%0.21%
Charles Schwab Corp/The2.75%0.20%
Walt Disney Co/The1.25%0.20%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in MOATOnly in URTH
Brown-Forman Corp 2.39%APPLE 5.28%
Tyler Technologies Inc 2.37%ALPHABET CLASS A 2.14%
Clorox Co/The 1.98%ALPHABET CLASS C 1.70%
Jack Henry & Associates Inc 1.50%MICRON TECHNOLOGY 1.21%
Guidewire Software Inc 1.29%TESLA INC 1.15%
Domino's Pizza Inc 1.18%JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 1.04%
Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc 1.13%ELI LILLY 0.99%
Marketaxess Holdings Inc 1.02%ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES 0.90%

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 URTH on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
URTH
iShares MSCI World ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerVanEckiShares
What it isMorningstar Wide MoatMSCI World
Total return, 1 year+11.3%+17.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−6.2 pts−0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.46%0.24%
Already in the S&P 50091.6%70.3%
Holdings551230

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.

URTH in plain words

URTH is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI World. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 70% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1230 positions, with the top ten at 26.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, MOAT or URTH?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, MOAT returned +11.3% and URTH returned +17.4%, so URTH returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, MOAT or URTH?
MOAT charges 0.46% a year and URTH charges 0.24%, so URTH is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do MOAT and URTH overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 92% of MOAT and 70% of URTH by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 13% 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 URTH, 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 URTH, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/moat-vs-urth Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources