GQGU vs MTAW
GQG US Equity ETF vs Meta AI Lab Ecosystem ETF
Which is better, GQGU or MTAW?
GQGU costs less.
GQGU has a lower expense ratio. MTAW is less concentrated, with 54.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.2%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GQGU | MTAW |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49%Best | 0.59% |
| AUM | $584M | $2M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.95% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 77 | 25 |
| YTD Return | +5.40%Best | -1.65% |
| 1Y Return | +3.28% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.2% | 54.5%Best |
| Fund Family | GQG Partners LLC | Harbor Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 31, 2019 | Aug 12, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
GQGU vs MTAW growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
GQGU vs MTAW Performance
GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU) is an ETF from GQG Partners LLC and Meta AI Lab Ecosystem ETF (MTAW) is an ETF from Harbor Funds. Year to date, GQGU is up 5.40% versus a loss of 1.65% for MTAW.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GQGU charges 0.49% per year while MTAW charges 0.59%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $59 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GQGU currently yields 0.95% against 0.00% for MTAW.
Holdings Overlap
27.3% of GQGU's money is in holdings MTAW also owns. 47.0% of MTAW's money is in holdings GQGU also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
9 positions in common, counted across the 38 positions we hold weights for in GQGU and 25 in MTAW, against full books of 77 and 25.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 11 positions for MTAW that do not appear in our book for GQGU (32.7% of the fund), and 27 for GQGU that do not appear in MTAW (69.6%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GQGU | Weight in MTAW | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.68% | 19.11% | 17.43% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 9.37% | 3.50% | 5.87% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 7.25% | 3.17% | 4.08% |
| YNDXYandex Nv Ord Eur.01 Cl A Nasdaq Stock Exchange | 1.42% | 4.41% | 2.99% |
| ORCLOracle Corp - Common | 1.51% | 4.01% | 2.50% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.56% | 2.92% | 0.36% |
| CRWVCoreweave, Inc. | 1.04% | 3.68% | 2.64% |
| GLWCorning Inc. | 1.22% | 3.43% | 2.21% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 1.29% | 2.73% | 1.44% |
47.0% of MTAW is already inside GQGU.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GQGU or MTAW?
GQGU has an expense ratio of 0.49% while MTAW charges 0.59%. GQGU is the cheaper option, by $10 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between GQGU and MTAW?
47.0% of MTAW's money is in holdings GQGU also owns. 47.0% of MTAW's is in holdings GQGU also owns. They hold 9 positions in common, counted across the 38 positions we hold weights for in GQGU and 25 in MTAW.
Which pays a higher dividend, GQGU or MTAW?
GQGU yields 0.95% while MTAW yields 0.00%, so GQGU currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MTAW better than GQGU?
GQGU has a lower expense ratio. MTAW is less concentrated, with 54.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.