ONEQ vs TGRW: Differences, Returns & Fees
ONEQ and TGRW hold 50% of their weight in the same names, and ONEQ returned +16.3% over the year. Net assets: $10.9bn on Sep 30, 2026 for Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF, and $1.2bn on Oct 20, 2026 for T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF.
ONEQ costs 0.31 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 13.7 points.
| ONEQ | TGRW | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.21% | 0.52% |
| Net assets, ONEQ as of Sep 30, 2026 and TGRW as of Oct 20, 2026 | $10.9bn | $1.2bn |
| Total return, 1 year | +16.3% | +2.6% |
| What it tracks | Nasdaq Composite Index | No index, actively managed |
| Holdings in common | 50% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 57.6% | 58.8% |
| Below its high | 4.3%, high on Oct 6, 2026 | 5.5%, high on Oct 6, 2026 |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.
ONEQ and TGRW are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- What each follows. ONEQ follows Nasdaq Composite Index and TGRW follows No index, actively managed.
- Holdings in common. 50% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026).
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 20, 2026 ONEQ returned +16.3% and TGRW +2.6% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 13.7 points.
Data as of Oct 20, 2026. The differences are picked by a fixed rule, in a fixed order; the PDF prints it. Page 2 has the returns, overlap, risks and sources.
Take this comparison to a client
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Not advice. The brief uses the figures on this page, with the data date and a report id. Saved comparisons are listed on your saved page; privacy.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, ONEQ and TGRW hold 50% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated May 31, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.
half
50% in common
On the same fields
ONEQ and TGRW on the fields both publish, as of Oct 20, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
About ONEQ
ONEQ tracks the Nasdaq Composite. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +16.3% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.21% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1,021 positions, with the top ten at 57.6%. It sat 4.3% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
About TGRW
TGRW is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.52% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 93% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 80 positions, with the top ten at 58.8%. It sat 5.5% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +2.6% with distributions reinvested, against +4.0% for its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Growth Index.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, ONEQ or TGRW?
- In the year to Oct 20, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ONEQ returned +16.3% and TGRW +2.6%.
- Which is cheaper, ONEQ or TGRW?
- ONEQ is cheaper, by 0.31 percentage points a year. That is about $31 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. 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, ONEQ against TGRW, data as of Oct 20, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/oneq-vs-tgrw
ETFIQ. (Oct 20, 2026). ONEQ against TGRW. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/oneq-vs-tgrw
[ONEQ against TGRW (ETFIQ, Oct 20, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/oneq-vs-tgrw)
Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.