GXC ranks 4th and CGRO 24th of 28 funds in the China Category.
CGRO vs GXC
GXC −0.30pt a year
0.89%0.59%
GXC 39.4×the volume
59423.4K
GXC +6.9pt
+1.6%+8.5%
CGRO vs GXC Performance
−32.1%−18.4%
- CGRO 0.89%
- GXC 0.59%, better
- CGRO $2M
- GXC $421M
- CGRO −32.1%
- GXC −18.4%, better
- CGRO 31.31%, better
- GXC 2.44%
- CGRO 31
- GXC 1539
- CGRO 594 sh
- GXC 23.4K sh, better
- CGRO $15.46
- GXC $80.17
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | CGRO | GXC |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | F10 | A78Higher |
| Mission | A79 | A85Higher |
| Risk | D29 | B68Higher |
| Tradability | D30 | B69Higher |
| Holdings | D31 | A76Higher |
| Durability | D27 | A84Higher |
Rank among China funds
Same Category. CGRO and GXC are both graded against the same 28 China funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
CGROD
GXCA
In short
CGRO Most China ETFs hand you an index and hundreds of tickers. CGRO goes the other way: a concentrated 30-to-40 stock book, built from top-down sector calls across the mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan, at 0.89%.
GXC The whole China market in one ticker: roughly 1,400 stocks from megacaps down to small caps, tracked since 2007. Most China funds buy the famous names. GXC buys the phone book.
Stated mandate
CGRO The fund primarily invests in equity securities of growth companies with exposure to the economies of Greater China.
GXC The fund seeks to provide returns that generally correspond to the total return performance of the S&P China BMI Index.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
CGRO vs GXC 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.
CGRO vs GXC Cost
Overpaying CGRO vs GXC
$5,237
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
CGRO 0.89%
$16,872
GXC 0.59%
$11,635
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | CGRO | GXC | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,576 | $1,058 | $518 |
| 20 | $5,953 | $4,051 | $1,902 |
| 30 | $16,872 | $11,635 | $5,237 |
- 0.89%CGRO
- 0.59%GXC, cheaper
- Middle half of China funds
- Median 0.65%
GXC 5th cheapest of 28 funds
CGRO 24th cheapest of 28 funds
CGRO vs GXC Dividends
- CGRO 31.31%, better
- GXC 2.44%
- CGRO $4.92
- GXC $1.99
- CGRO $4.17
- GXC $0.67
- CGRO Sep 29, 2026
- GXC Jun 22, 2026
- CGRO Sep 30, 2026
- GXC Jun 26, 2026
- CGRO Twice a year
- GXC Twice a year
Distribution history
CGRO vs GXC Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- CGRO 24.4%GXC 20.7%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- CGRO −0.01GXC 0.27, better
- Worst fall
- CGRO −38.0%GXC −46.5%
- Market sensitivity
- CGRO 0.24GXC 0.69
Popular comparisons
- 0.89% · 0.32%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.59% · 0.32%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.89% · 0.19%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.59% · 0.19%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.89% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.59% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.