Data as of . Every figure is the themes desk's own, on published data.
CIBR vs ICLN
0% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CIBR and ICLN hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in CIBR | Only in ICLN |
|---|---|
| Palo Alto Networks, Inc. 8.92% | BLOOM ENERGY CORPORATION 13.79% |
| CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (Class A) 8.79% | NEXTPOWER INC. 7.31% |
| Fortinet, Inc. 8.54% | FIRST SOLAR, INC. 7.18% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. 6.84% | China Yangtze Power Co., Ltd. 5.92% |
| Broadcom Inc. 6.04% | VESTAS WIND SYSTEMS A/S 3.38% |
| Cloudflare, Inc. (Class A) 4.35% | PLUG POWER INC. 3.29% |
| Okta, Inc. 4.17% | ENPHASE ENERGY, INC. 3.26% |
| Zscaler, Inc. 3.47% | EQUATORIAL S.A. 2.90% |
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 as filed for Apr 30, 2026 and Sep 4, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIBR | ICLN | CIBR | ICLN | CIBR | ICLN | |
| 3 months | +9.2% | −16.4% | +4.5 pts | −21.1 pts | +7.1 pts | −18.5 pts |
| 6 months | +43.7% | +2.2% | +28.5 pts | −12.9 pts | +23.5 pts | −17.9 pts |
| 1 year | +31.4% | +25.3% | +11.5 pts | +5.3 pts | +5.9 pts | −0.3 pts |
| 3 years | +102.4% | +17.5% | +24.5 pts | −60.4 pts | +8.9 pts | −75.9 pts |
| Since launch | +402.1% | +10.6% | +57.6 pts | −800.8 pts | −220.6 pts | −1673.5 pts |
| CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | First Trust | iShares |
| Theme | Cybersecurity | Clean energy |
| In the S&P 500 | 61.9% | 7.2% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 90.7% | 100.0% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 47.9% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 43 | 122 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 56.9% | 51.8% |
| Expense ratio | 0.58% | 0.38% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.64% | 0.38% |
| Total return, 1 year | +31.4% | +25.3% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +11.5 pts | +5.3 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | +5.9 pts | −0.3 pts |
| Below its high | −7.5% | −42.8% |
CIBR in plain words
By weight, 62% of CIBR's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 91%. The top ten holdings are 57% of the fund across 43 positions, as filed for Sep 3, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +31.4% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 11.5 pts. It sits 7.5% below its all-time high of Aug 13, 2026.
ICLN in plain words
By weight, 7% of ICLN's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 52% of the fund across 122 positions, as filed for Apr 30, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +25.3% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 5.3 pts. It sits 42.8% below its all-time high of Jan 7, 2021.
Questions people ask
- Do CIBR and ICLN hold the same stocks?
- By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight, which is mostly different names. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
- Which is more different from the S&P 500, CIBR or ICLN?
- CIBR has 62% of its weight in S&P 500 names and ICLN has 7%, so ICLN differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, CIBR or ICLN?
- CIBR charges 0.58% a year and ICLN charges 0.38%, so ICLN is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, CIBR against ICLN, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/CIBR-ICLN.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.