What are ETFs and how do they work in the context of cybersecurity investing?

An ETF is a type of fund that holds multiple investments and trades like a stock. For cybersecurity ETFs, this means owning shares in many firms. CIBR and HACK bundle companies, giving investors access to a thematic approach without buying individual stocks.

How do the expense ratios of CIBR and HACK compare over time?

CIBR's expense ratio is 0.58%, while HACK's is 0.60%. Lower fees can improve long-term returns by reducing annual charges.

What role does concentration play in holding selection for these ETFs?

Concentration refers to how much weight a single stock carries in a fund's portfolio. CIBR's top holding is CRWD at 9.45%, indicating significant exposure to one company. In contrast, HACK distributes its holdings more evenly, with each position under 6.5%. Diversification strategies vary between the two funds.

Do CIBR and HACK invest in the same companies?

Yes, there is substantial overlap in their holdings. Both funds include nine of the same companies in their top-10 lists: CRWD, PANW, FTNT, CSCO, AVGO, NET, OKTA, ZS and RBRK. This suggests similar investment strategies, although weighting differs slightly between the two.

How does asset size differ between the two cybersecurity ETFs?

Net assets reflect the fund's total size. CIBR manages $16.4 billion, providing better liquidity and potentially tighter bid-ask spreads, which can aid active traders or larger transactions, whereas HACK holds $1.7 billion, which may result in slightly lower liquidity.

What can investors learn from inception dates of these funds?

Inception date shows operational history. HACK launched in Nov 2014, and CIBR in Jul 2015. The earlier start date gives HACK a slightly longer track record, although both are relatively recent additions to the cybersecurity theme.

What does the dividend yield difference between CIBR and HACK imply for income?

Yields vary: CIBR offers 0.38%, providing modest income. HACK yields 0.05%, minimal payout. Dividends may be distributed regularly or reinvested.

Why is it important to consider the index tracked by an ETF?

The index tracked shows investment goals and composition. Unfortunately, both CIBR and HACK don't specify this information. It is advisable to look for additional sources to better understand their approach and potential alignment with cybersecurity market trends.

Should investors consider the lack of transparency in fund data when comparing ETFs?

Both funds have areas where data is not disclosed. The CIBR fund has limited information on sector weights, and neither fund specifies index tracked. Such gaps require additional due diligence to evaluate fund strategy.

What does this comparison mean for investors seeking exposure to cybersecurity?

CIBR and HACK represent distinct paths into cybersecurity investing. CIBR's higher yield and lower fees may suit income-focused and cost-sensitive investors, while HACK's broader spread and longer track record could appeal to those prioritising diversification and historical data. Neither approach is inherently superior. Understanding these nuances helps guide portfolio decisions based on investment style. This is not financial advice.

CIBR vs HACK

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) and ISE Cyber Security ETF PureFunds (HACK). This page reviews fees, holdings and dividends, alongside how each fund tracks its market. Note that CIBR has a 0.58% expense ratio and $16.4 billion in net assets, while HACK has a 0.60% expense ratio and $1.7 billion. Educational content, not financial advice.

Compare First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) and ISE Cyber Security ETF PureFunds (HACK). This page reviews fees, holdings and dividends, alongside how each fund tracks its market. Note that CI...

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

CIBR

Metric

HACK

0.58%

Expense Ratio

0.60%

0.38%

Dividend Yield

0.05%

$16.39B

Net Assets

$1.73B

48

Holdings

26

Jul 7, 2015

Inception Date

Nov 11, 2014

–

Index Tracked

–

Technology

Fund Category

Technology

CIBR costs about $2.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	CIBR	HACK
CRWDCrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.	9.45%	6.21%
PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc.	9.36%	6.30%
FTNTFortinet, Inc.	8.79%	5.24%
CSCOCisco Systems, Inc.	6.43%	4.73%
AVGOBroadcom Inc.	5.46%	4.81%
NETCloudflare, Inc.	4.85%	5.74%
OKTAOkta, Inc.	4.33%	5.38%
ZSZscaler, Inc.	3.76%	4.90%
RBRKRubrik, Inc.	3.17%	4.66%

Discover More Comparisons

CIBR vs IHAK

Compare CIBR and IHAK fees, holdings, dividends, and tracking. CIBR expenses are 0.58%, IHAK is 0.47%, with distinct yield and asset base differences.

CIBR vs VOO

Compare CIBR and VOO ETFs. Review expense ratios, net assets, dividend yields, top holdings and tracking differences for factual educational analysis.

CIBR vs IGV

Compare CIBR and IGV ETFs. Review expenses, dividends and holdings for cybersecurity and software sectors. Note tracking index is not available.

Investment Analysis

CIBR

Pros

CIBR manages significantly larger net assets of $16.4 billion compared to the smaller fund.
Higher dividend yield of 0.38% provides modest income relative to the alternative fund.
Concentrated top holdings like CRWD at 9.45% offer targeted exposure to leading firms.

Considerations

Expense ratio of 0.58% is slightly lower than the competitor but still notable.
Lack of available index methodology details may hinder transparent strategy evaluation for investors.
Sector weight information is not available, limiting immediate insight into specific market exposure.

HACK

Pros

HACK's inception date of November 2014 indicates a slightly longer operational history than Fund A.
Lower expense ratio of 0.60% compared to similar thematic funds might appeal to cost-conscious investors.
Distributed top holdings with weights under 6.5% suggest potentially less single-stock concentration risk.

Considerations

Net assets of $1.7 billion are substantially smaller than Fund A, indicating lower liquidity.
Dividend yield of 0.05% offers negligible income, which may not suit yield-focused investors.
Issuer details are not available, creating potential uncertainty regarding fund management reputation.

Related Market Insights

Cybersecurity's Regulatory Reset: Why the SEC's SolarWinds Retreat Changes Everything

The SEC's SolarWinds retreat removes liability fears, unlocking corporate cybersecurity spending. Discover investment opportunities in leading firms like Palo Alto, CrowdStrike & Fortinet.