Data as of .
CIBR vs XAR: which is really different?
CIBR holds 62.2% of its weight in S&P 500 companies and XAR 35.0%.
ETFIQ Off-Index Score: XAR scores higher
How much of it is not the index it is sold as an alternative to?
A percentile among the 371 thematic ETFs with a holdings filing. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All thematic ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CIBR and XAR hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in CIBR | Only in XAR |
|---|---|
| Palo Alto Networks, Inc. 9.10% | RTX CORP 3.34% |
| Fortinet, Inc. 8.72% | VSE CORP 3.33% |
| CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (Class A) 8.66% | ATI INC 3.25% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. 6.76% | ARCHER AVIATION INC A 3.23% |
| Broadcom Inc. 6.12% | AXON ENTERPRISE INC 3.20% |
| Cloudflare, Inc. (Class A) 4.87% | GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 3.11% |
| Okta, Inc. 4.20% | GENERAL ELECTRIC 3.04% |
| Zscaler, Inc. 3.36% | LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP 3.02% |
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.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIBR | XAR | CIBR | XAR | CIBR | XAR | |
| 3 months | +10.7% | −12.1% | +7.4 pts | −15.4 pts | +11.5 pts | −11.3 pts |
| 6 months | +45.3% | −7.2% | +29.3 pts | −23.2 pts | +24.6 pts | −27.9 pts |
| 1 year | +25.6% | +11.8% | +8.1 pts | −5.7 pts | +2.6 pts | −11.2 pts |
| 3 years | +103.7% | +114.1% | +25.8 pts | +36.2 pts | +8.6 pts | +19.0 pts |
| Since launch | +401.1% | +1042.3% | +60.0 pts | +288.5 pts | −217.5 pts | −366.6 pts |
| CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF Holds 43 stocks in cybersecurity, 62% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | XAR State Street(R) SPDR(R) S&P(R) Aerospace & Defense ETF Holds 49 stocks in defense, 35% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | First Trust | State Street |
| Theme | Cybersecurity | Defense |
| In the S&P 500 | 62.2% | 35.0% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 90.8% | 97.9% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 48.1% | 3.2% |
| Holdings | 43 | 49 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 57.7% | 31.4% |
| Expense ratio | 0.58% | 0.35% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.64% | 0.36% |
| Total return, 1 year | +25.6% | +11.8% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +8.1 pts | −5.7 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | +2.6 pts | −11.2 pts |
| Below its high | −7.6% | −17.1% |
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 58% of the fund across 43 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 10, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +25.6% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 8.1 pts. It sits 7.6% below its all-time high of Aug 13, 2026.
XAR in plain words
By weight, 35% of XAR's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 98%. The top ten holdings are 31% of the fund across 49 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 10, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +11.8% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 5.7 pts. It sits 17.1% below its all-time high of Aug 14, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which is more different from the S&P 500, CIBR or XAR?
- CIBR has 62% of its weight in S&P 500 names and XAR has 35%, so XAR differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, CIBR or XAR?
- CIBR charges 0.58% a year and XAR charges 0.35%, so XAR 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 XAR, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/cibr-vs-xar Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.