Skip to content
etf.net

ACGO vs GUSE

Hartford Alpha Capture Growth ETF

ACGOBCboe

Goldman Sachs Enhanced U.S. Equity ETF

GUSEANasdaq

Overlap

45.6%by weight

Expense ratio

GUSE −0.12pt a year

ACGO0.42%GUSE0.30%

Avg volume · 30D

GUSE 58.2×the volume

ACGO428GUSE24.9K

ACGO vs GUSE Performance

Jul 31, 2026 – Oct 30, 2026

−0.4%ACGO+0.5%GUSE

Jul 31, 2026 to Oct 30, 2026. ACGO −0.4%. GUSE +0.5%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.2%4%6%8%Jul 2026Sep 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
ACGO 0.42%
GUSE 0.30%, better
Fund size
ACGO $103M
GUSE $421M
Holdings
ACGO 69
GUSE 122
Avg volume (30D)
ACGO 428 sh
GUSE 24.9K sh, better
NAV per share
ACGO $36.53
GUSE $46.05
52W range

ETF.net Grade

ACGO: Cost 77, Risk 47, Mission not scored, Tradability 42, Holdings 44, Durability 35. GUSE: Cost 97, Risk 94, Mission not scored, Tradability 46, Holdings 89, Durability 85.
Pillar letters and Scores for ACGO, GUSE, with each pillar’s weight
PillarACGOGUSE
Cost30% weightA77A97Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightC47A94Higher
Tradability15% weightC42C46Higher
Holdings10% weightC44A89Higher
Durability5% weightD35A85Higher

Rank among US Active Growth funds

How we build Categories ›
Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. ACGO and GUSE are both graded against the same 90 US Active Growth funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

US Active Growth⁠

Category · 90 funds
See all 90 ›

GUSE ranks 2nd and ACGO 32nd of 90 funds in the US Active Growth Category.

  1. Rank 1AJUSAJPMorgan U.S. Research Enhanced Large Cap ETFScore 86
  2. Rank 2AGUSEGoldman Sachs Enhanced U.S. Equity ETFScore 84
  3. Rank 3ALRGCAB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETFScore 81
  4. Rank 30BMFIGMotley Fool Innovative Growth ETFScore 57
  5. Rank 32BACGOHartford Alpha Capture Growth ETFScore 56
  6. Rank 32BFBCGFidelity Blue Chip Growth ETFScore 56

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

ACGOBHartford Alpha Capture Growth ETF

GUSEAGoldman Sachs Enhanced U.S. Equity ETF

In short

ACGO No data

GUSE Goldman's fundamental stock pickers hunting long-term growth in US companies, for 0.30% a year. The strategy dates to 2008 and charges well under the typical active US growth fund.

Stated mandate

ACGO No data

GUSE The Fund seeks long-term growth of capital by investing in companies that the Investment Adviser believes are positioned for long-term growth.

Why people hold it

ACGO No data

  • GUSE Charges 0.30% a year, against a 0.54% median for its active US growth cohort. Cheap, for stock picking.
  • Actively run with no index to shadow. Managers hold companies they judge positioned for long-term growth, so the portfolio can look different from a large-cap benchmark.
  • Inception dates to 2008, so the strategy has run through multiple market cycles, not one long rally.
  • One of the stronger implementations in a crowded field of active US growth funds.

Worth knowing

ACGO No data

  • GUSE Trades thinly next to the category's heavyweights. Spreads can be wider, which bites most on large or hurried orders.
  • Two peers in the same top tier undercut it on fee: JUSA at 0.12% and FELG at 0.18%. Price is not where this one stands out.
  • Distributions land once or twice a year, not monthly. Growth of capital is the stated goal, not an income stream.

Full ACGO profile⁠

Full GUSE profile⁠

ACGO vs GUSE Holdings

How ACGO and GUSE differ

Overlap by weight

45.6%

Shared holdings make up 82.6% of ACGO and 52.3% of GUSE.

Level by level

  • Holdings35 in both45.6%
  • Countryby domicile98.9%
  • Asset classEquity100%

Sector

No Sector split for GUSE.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in ACGO and GUSE, widest gap first
CountryMore in ACGOMore in GUSE
MexicoACGO +0.7 points
TaiwanGUSE +0.6 points
Other countries (2)GUSE +0.1 points

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • ACGO60.6%
  • GUSE34.6%

Securities held

  • ACGO68
  • GUSE121

Asset class

ACGO
Equity
GUSE
Equity

Holdings

  • Only in ACGO33
  • In both35
  • Only in GUSE86

Only in ACGO

33 securities, 17.4% of ACGO by weight

  • Parker Hannifin Corp Common Stock USD.51.35%
  • Lam Research Corp Common Stock USD.0011.06%
  • Targa Resources Corp Common Stock USD.0011.02%

Only in GUSE

86 securities, 47.7% of GUSE by weight

  • Coca-Cola Company (The)1.81%
  • JPMorgan Chase & Co1.66%
  • Berkshire Hathaway Inc.1.61%

Weight gaps

All 35 Holdings in both funds, largest gap first.

Holding weights in ACGO and GUSE, widest gap first
HoldingMore in ACGOMore in GUSE
Alphabet Inc Class C Common Stock USD.001GOOGACGO +7.56 points
NVIDIA Corp Common Stock USD.001NVDAACGO +7.01 points
Apple Inc Common Stock USD.00001AAPLACGO +3.49 points
Broadcom Inc Common StockAVGOACGO +2.48 points
Eli Lilly & Co Common StockLLYACGO +2.29 points
Amazon.com Inc Common Stock USD.01AMZNGUSE +2.10 points
Mastercard Inc A Common Stock USD.0001MAACGO +1.87 points
Alphabet Inc Class A Common Stock USD.001GOOGLGUSE +1.77 points

All ACGO holdings⁠All 121 GUSE holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

ACGO vs GUSE Cost

Overpaying ACGO vs GUSE

$2,323

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • ACGO 0.42%

    $8,472

  • GUSE 0.30%

    $6,149

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • ACGO 0.42%
  • GUSE 0.30%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$2K$4K$6K$8K$10K051015202530ACGO $8,472GUSE $6,149

Year by year

YearACGOGUSEOverpaying
10$759$545$214
20$2,927$2,113$814
30$8,472$6,149$2,323

Expense ratio

  • 0.42%ACGO
  • 0.30%GUSE, cheaper
  • Middle half of US Active Growth funds
  • Median 0.55%

GUSE 3rd cheapest of 90 funds

ACGO 22nd cheapest of 90 funds

ACGO vs GUSE Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
ACGO None
GUSE No data
Last payment
ACGO No data
GUSE $0.30
Ex-dividend
ACGO No data
GUSE Dec 23, 2025
Paid on
ACGO No data
GUSE Dec 30, 2025
Frequency
ACGO No data
GUSE Irregular

Distribution history

Per share, 2025 to 2026, same scale for both

ACGOAll ACGO payments⁠

No distribution history available.

GUSEIrregular · 1 paymentAll GUSE payments⁠
One bar per payment. 1 payment from 2025 to 2026 YTD. Dec 23, 2025 $0.30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$0.252026YTD

ACGO vs GUSE Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
ACGO 1.72GUSE 0.93

Popular comparisons

  • ACGOBvsJUSAA

    Hartford Alpha Capture Growth ETF · JPMorgan U.S. Research Enhanced Large Cap ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.42% · 0.18%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • GUSEAvsJUSAA

    Goldman Sachs Enhanced U.S. Equity ETF · JPMorgan U.S. Research Enhanced Large Cap ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.30% · 0.18%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • ACGOBvsLRGCA

    Hartford Alpha Capture Growth ETF · AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.42% · 0.39%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • GUSEAvsLRGCA

    Goldman Sachs Enhanced U.S. Equity ETF · AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.30% · 0.39%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • ACGOBvsFELGA

    Hartford Alpha Capture Growth ETF · Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.42% · 0.18%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • GUSEAvsFELGA

    Goldman Sachs Enhanced U.S. Equity ETF · Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.30% · 0.18%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.