ATFV vs XAIW
Alger 35 ETF vs SpaceXAI Lab Ecosystem ETF
Which is better, ATFV or XAIW?
ATFV costs less.
ATFV has a lower expense ratio. ATFV is less concentrated, with 55.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 65.7%.
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 | ATFV | XAIW |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.56%Best | 0.59% |
| AUM | $888M | $2M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.20% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 74 | 52 |
| YTD Return | +0.94%Best | -13.79% |
| 1Y Return | +0.67% | - |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +32.31% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.61% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 55.4%Best | 65.7% |
| Fund Family | Alger | Harbor Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 4, 2021 | Aug 12, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
ATFV vs XAIW 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.
ATFV vs XAIW Performance
Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) is an ETF from Alger and SpaceXAI Lab Ecosystem ETF (XAIW) is an ETF from Harbor Funds. Year to date, ATFV is up 0.94% versus a loss of 13.79% for XAIW.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ATFV charges 0.56% per year while XAIW charges 0.59%. On a $10,000 position that is $56 vs $59 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ATFV currently yields 0.20% against 0.00% for XAIW.
Holdings Overlap
29.7% of ATFV's money is in holdings XAIW also owns. 45.2% of XAIW's money is in holdings ATFV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
7 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in ATFV and 25 in XAIW, against full books of 74 and 52.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 14 positions for XAIW that do not appear in our book for ATFV (44.5% of the fund), and 24 for ATFV that do not appear in XAIW (66.2%).
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 ATFV | Weight in XAIW | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| SPCXSpace Exploration Technologies | 1.24% | 20.56% | 19.32% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 13.22% | 7.68% | 5.54% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.38% | 3.34% | 3.04% |
| 2330:TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd | 2.76% | 4.64% | 1.88% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.89% | 4.73% | 2.84% |
| MDBMongodb, Inc. | 2.07% | 2.25% | 0.18% |
| GEVGe Vernova | 2.13% | 1.96% | 0.17% |
45.2% of XAIW is already inside ATFV.
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, ATFV or XAIW?
ATFV has an expense ratio of 0.56% while XAIW charges 0.59%. ATFV is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between ATFV and XAIW?
45.2% of XAIW's money is in holdings ATFV also owns. 45.2% of XAIW's is in holdings ATFV also owns. They hold 7 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in ATFV and 25 in XAIW.
Which pays a higher dividend, ATFV or XAIW?
ATFV yields 0.20% while XAIW yields 0.00%, so ATFV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XAIW better than ATFV?
ATFV has a lower expense ratio. ATFV is less concentrated, with 55.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 65.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.