CGGO vs IWF: Holdings Overlap
CGGOCapital Group Global Growth Equity ETF
Capital Group · 104 holdings · $11.5B · as of 2026-05-31
IWFiShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
iShares · 387 holdings · $127.3B · as of 2026-03-31
Holdings snapshots are 61 days apart (CGGO: 2026-05-31, IWF: 2026-03-31). Weights and index membership change between snapshots, so the true current overlap is typically higher than shown. For funds tracking the same index, the gap can be 5–15 points.
How similar are CGGO and IWF?
Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF (CGGO, by Capital Group) holds 104 positions; iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF, by iShares) holds 387. They have 33 holdings in common, and by portfolio weight the two funds are 20.4% identical. In practical terms the pair is lightly overlapping, with most of each portfolio distinct.
- Overlap by Weight
- 20.4%Sum of the smaller weight of each shared holding
- Shared Holdings
- 33CGGO holds 104 · IWF holds 387
- Weight in Shared Holdings
- CGGO 33%·IWF 61%Share of each fund's weight in stocks both funds own
Based on each fund's latest official holdings. How is this calculated?
What makes each fund different
Only in CGGO
71 of 104 positions (65.4% of the fund) are not held by IWF. Showing the top 30 by weight.
Sector Breakdown
| Sector | CGGO | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 39.1% | 49.2% |
| Industrials | 13.4% | 6.7% |
| Consumer Discretionary | 8.3% | 13.1% |
| Communication Services | 6.7% | 12.4% |
| Financials | 10.4% | 5.9% |
| Other Sectors | 17.2% | 12.5% |
| Unclassified | 3.0% | 0.0% |
Share of each fund's portfolio weight by GICS-style sector, compiled from issuer fund data and our own classification of the holdings, not the issuers' published sector charts. “Unclassified” is weight we could not classify (3% of CGGO, 0% of IWF).
Performance
| Fund | 1M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y (ann.) | 5Y (ann.) | 10Y (ann.) | Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGGO | -0.2% | +17.3% | +26.5% | +20.0% | — | — | 0.98% |
| IWF | +2.7% | +5.5% | +13.1% | +22.0% | +12.6% | +17.8% | 0.35% |
Total returns including dividends, from adjusted daily closes as of 2026-08-07. 3Y/5Y/10Y are annualized. Yield is trailing-12-month distributions over the last close. Past performance does not predict future results.
Project the growth of $10,000 in CGGO vs IWF →
Shared Holdings(33)
The top 10 shared positions account for 77% of the overlap, led by AVGO, GOOGL and MSFT.
3.70% | 4.79% | 3.70% | |
3.02% | 3.54% | 3.02% | |
2.04% | 8.82% | 2.04% | |
1.39% | 12.92% | 1.39% | |
1.37% | 3.46% | 1.37% | |
0.89% | 2.66% | 0.89% | |
0.88% | 1.84% | 0.88% | |
0.85% | 1.06% | 0.85% | |
0.76% | 0.85% | 0.76% | |
0.75% | 11.64% | 0.75% | |
0.74% | 1.60% | 0.74% | |
0.73% | 4.66% | 0.73% | |
0.65% | 0.46% | 0.46% | |
1.14% | 0.41% | 0.41% | |
0.81% | 0.34% | 0.34% | |
0.32% | 0.70% | 0.32% | |
0.63% | 0.23% | 0.23% | |
1.46% | 0.23% | 0.23% | |
0.60% | 0.18% | 0.18% | |
0.84% | 0.17% | 0.17% | |
0.61% | 0.15% | 0.15% | |
1.42% | 0.13% | 0.13% | |
0.78% | 0.11% | 0.11% | |
0.42% | 0.10% | 0.10% | |
0.51% | 0.09% | 0.09% |
Frequently Asked Questions
How much do CGGO and IWF overlap?
CGGO and IWF overlap by 20.4% of portfolio weight. They share 33 holdings (CGGO holds 104 positions and IWF holds 387), based on each fund's latest SEC-reported holdings.
Is it redundant to own both CGGO and IWF?
The two portfolios are 20.4% identical by weight. Owning both is not redundant. Most of each portfolio is distinct, so the funds can serve different roles.
What are the biggest shared holdings of CGGO and IWF?
The largest positions held by both funds are AVGO, GOOGL, MSFT, NVDA and META. Together the top 10 shared positions account for 77% of the total overlap.
What does CGGO own that IWF doesn't?
71 positions (65.4% of CGGO) are unique to CGGO, led by TSM, MU and 000660. In the other direction, 354 positions (38.4% of IWF) are unique to IWF.