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

MTUM vs QUAL: how they differ

MTUM and QUAL hold 22% of their weight in the same names, and MTUM returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF and iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, MTUM and QUAL hold 22% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions MTUM and QUAL both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingMTUMQUAL
APPLIED MATERIAL INC2.87%2.81%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP2.69%2.35%
LAM RESEARCH2.31%3.59%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON3.38%2.17%
ALPHABET CLASS A2.69%1.94%
ALPHABET CLASS C2.13%1.53%
MERCK & CO INC1.83%1.40%
KLA1.18%2.42%
FORTINET0.89%1.15%
ARISTA NETWORKS0.83%1.46%
COCA-COLA1.89%0.82%
HOWMET AEROSPACE0.54%0.68%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in MTUMOnly in QUAL
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES 5.39%MICROSOFT 7.67%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY 5.20%APPLE 7.10%
INTEL CORPORATION 4.14%NVIDIA 6.44%
CISCO SYSTEMS INC 3.48%META PLATFORMS CLASS A 4.32%
SANDISK 3.10%ELI LILLY 3.62%
PALO ALTO NETWORKS 2.40%TJX 3.23%
SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PLC 2.35%VISA CLASS A 3.21%
CATERPILLAR INC 2.14%MASTERCARD CLASS A 2.28%

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.

MTUM and QUAL on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
QUAL
iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI USA Momentum FactorMSCI USA Quality Factor
Total return, 1 year+21.8%+16.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+4.3 pts−1.5 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50098.2%98.9%
Holdings128121

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.

QUAL in plain words

QUAL is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Quality Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 99% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 121 positions, with the top ten at 44.4%. It sat 3.1% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, MTUM or QUAL?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, MTUM returned +21.8% and QUAL returned +16.0%, so MTUM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, MTUM or QUAL?
MTUM charges 0.15% a year and QUAL charges 0.15%, so MTUM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do MTUM and QUAL overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 98% of MTUM and 99% of QUAL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 22% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources