What are expense ratios and how do they compare between these two technology ETFs?

An expense ratio is the annual fee a fund charges, expressed as a percentage of the assets it manages. Fund A has a 0.08% expense ratio, while Fund B has a 0.09% ratio. Although this difference seems minor, it results in a 0.01 percentage point saving for Fund A. Over many years, even small fee differences can impact total return, making fee comparison a key aspect when evaluating similar funds.

What does it mean for an ETF to track a specific market segment?

Tracking a market segment involves an ETF replicating the performance of a specific index. Here, both ETFs aim to track the information technology sector. Fund A has $21.3 billion in assets, while Fund B has $150.2 billion. The fund's assets under management (AUM) do not necessarily indicate which one tracks better, but they are key figures for understanding its size and potential liquidity. Both funds' index tracking is not available for further comparison.

How similar are the holdings of these two ETFs?

Both ETFs have the same ten top holdings: NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, MU, AVGO, AMD, INTC, CSCO, PLTR, LRCX. Despite this overlap, there are slight variations in weightings. For example, Fund B holds Apple at 15.80% compared to Fund A's 16.69%. However, Fund B has a higher weighting in Broadcom at 4.52%. This shows that while the overall portfolio is similar, subtle differences in concentration can exist.

What is dividend yield and how does it differ for these funds?

The dividend yield is a measure of how much a fund pays in dividends relative to its price. Fund A has a dividend yield of 0.37%, while Fund B's yield is 0.34%. This 0.03 percentage point difference is relatively small. While the yield may influence an investor's focus on income, it is important to remember that ETFs distribute dividends to shareholders, and the yield can fluctuate with market conditions and the fund's underlying holdings.

Which fund has been available to investors for longer?

The length of a fund's track record can sometimes influence investor perception. Fund B was established in January 2004, giving it nearly twenty years of history. In contrast, Fund A was launched later, in October 2013, with a track record of about a decade. A longer track record means it has experienced more varied market conditions, which some investors may view positively as a sign of stability.

How does concentration in a single holding like Apple affect the risk profile?

Concentration risk arises when a fund has a significant portion of its assets in one company. Both funds hold Apple as a major position, but Fund A's weighting in Apple is 16.69%, compared to Fund B's 15.80%. This slight difference means Fund A may be marginally more susceptible to the performance of Apple's stock. The concentration in large-cap tech names influences both ETFs' market sensitivity.

Why is semiconductor exposure relevant when comparing these tech funds?

Semiconductor companies are a key part of the technology sector and can have varying volatility. Fund A holds Intel at 1.87% and Micron at 4.25%. Fund B holds Intel at 1.54% and Micron at 4.18%. While the differences are small, the relative exposure to Intel is lower in Fund B. This can be relevant for investors monitoring their exposure to the semiconductor sector, which may be sensitive to industry-specific developments.

What is the significance of a fund's net assets in an ETF comparison?

Net assets represent the total market value of all shares in the fund. Fund B has significantly larger net assets at $150.2 billion compared to Fund A's $21.3 billion. A larger asset base can indicate greater popularity and may lead to higher liquidity, potentially resulting in narrower bid-ask spreads when trading. It is an important practical factor for investors considering trading frequency and fund scale.

How should an investor interpret the data presented in this ETF comparison?

This comparison presents factual data on fees, assets, holdings and dividends to help you understand the funds' characteristics. It is not a recommendation to buy or sell any security. An investor should interpret the figures in the context of their own risk tolerance, investment horizon, and financial goals. Comparing these metrics is one step in the due diligence process for an ETF.

Educational disclaimer for this content.

This material is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. The data provided is current as of September 22, 2026. Investors should conduct their own research or consult a qualified financial adviser before making any investment decisions. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The comparisons shown reflect objective data from available sources and do not endorse any specific fund.

FTEC vs VGT

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

Compare FTEC and VGT on fees, holdings, dividends, and how each tracks the technology market. FTEC has a 0.08% expense ratio, $21.3bn net assets, and 0.37% yield; VGT has 0.09%, $150.2bn assets, and 0.34%. Their top 10 holdings are identical. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

FTEC

Metric

VGT

0.08%

Expense Ratio

0.09%

0.37%

Dividend Yield

0.34%

$21.25B

Net Assets

$150.23B

298

Holdings

323

Oct 21, 2013

Inception Date

Jan 26, 2004

–

Index Tracked

–

Technology

Fund Category

Technology

FTEC costs about $1.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	FTEC	VGT
NVDANVIDIA Corporation	17.49%	17.74%
AAPLApple Inc.	16.69%	15.80%
MSFTMicrosoft Corporation	11.22%	11.52%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.	4.25%	4.18%
AVGOBroadcom Inc.	4.21%	4.52%
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc.	3.41%	2.95%
INTCIntel Corporation	1.87%	1.54%
CSCOCisco Systems, Inc.	1.70%	1.71%
PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc.	1.51%	1.61%
LRCXLam Research Corporation	1.33%	1.49%

Discover More Comparisons

FTEC vs XLK

Compare FTEC and XLK ETFs. Review 0.08% fees, yields, holdings and tracking data to assess differences in assets and structure without financial advice.

FTEC vs QQQM

Compare FTEC vs QQQM on expenses, holdings, yields and tracking. Fidelity tech fund against Invesco Nasdaq growth ETF to see key factual differences.

SPMO vs VGT

Compare SPMO and VGT. Review fees, holdings, dividends and tracking. Both hold NVDA and AVGO but differ in strategy and sector focus for investors.

Investment Analysis

FTEC

Pros

This fund benefits from a slightly lower expense ratio of 0.08 per cent compared to the peer.
It offers substantial liquidity, with net assets currently standing at twenty one billion three hundred million dollars.
The fund features a marginally higher dividend yield of 0.37 per cent relative to the competitor.

Considerations

It carries a larger top ten holding weight in Apple at 16.69 per cent versus the peer.
The fund lacks the same longevity as the alternative having launched later in October 2013.
Intel exposure sits higher at 1.87 per cent, potentially increasing vulnerability to semiconductor sector volatility.

VGT

Pros

This ETF demonstrates exceptional scale with net assets of one hundred fifty billion two hundred million dollars.
It possesses a significant track record, having been established in January 2004 offering long term stability.
The fund shows slightly reduced concentration in Apple stock at 15.80 per cent compared to the peer.

Considerations

Investors face a marginally higher expense ratio of 0.09 per cent than the competing option.
The dividend yield is slightly lower at 0.34 per cent, reducing income generation potential.
Exposure to Broadcom is elevated at 4.52 per cent, potentially increasing single stock concentration risks.

About FTEC and VGT

FTEC (FTEC)

The Fidelity MSCI Information Tech ETF offers investors a cost-effective way to gain exposure to the U.S. technology sector. With an expense ratio of just 0.08%, this fund tracks a broad index of American companies involved in software, hardware, and services. Holding 298 different stocks, it provides diversified access to the sector's largest players as well as smaller emerging firms. Since its inception in October 2013, the fund has amassed substantial assets, currently exceeding USD 21 billion. Investors should note that while the fund offers low fees and wide coverage, its performance is directly tied to the technology sector's cyclical nature and growth prospects. Like all investments, values can rise and fall.

VGT (VGT)

The Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) aims to provide investors with exposure to companies operating in the technology sector, encompassing both US and international firms. As a broad market fund, it seeks to track the performance of the technology industry by holding a diversified basket of over 300 stocks. With a low expense ratio of 0.09%, it offers a cost-efficient way to gain access to major tech players. Investors should note that while the fund offers potential growth tied to technological innovation, it is heavily concentrated in the technology sector. This concentration means its value can fluctuate significantly based on sector-specific trends, regulatory changes, and market sentiment. Returns are not guaranteed, and values can rise and fall, making it suitable for those who understand the risks associated with sector-focused investing.

Buy FTEC or VGT in Nemo

🆓

Zero Commission

Trade stocks, ETFs, and more with zero commission. Keep more of your returns.

🔒

Trusted & Regulated

Part of Exinity Group 2015, serving over a million customers globally.

💰

6% Interest on Cash

Earn 6% AER on uninvested cash with daily interest payments.

FTEC vs VGT

Fund Snapshot