HACK vs CIBR ETF comparison
HACK vs CIBR
HACK holds 23 cybersecurity companies and also includes the defense contractors Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, and CIBR holds 45 cybersecurity companies, including large networking and IT services firms such as Cisco, Broadcom and Accenture. Both are cybersecurity funds, but they follow different indexes. HACK follows the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index, a short list of 23 names with weights of roughly 2% to 6%.
CIBR follows the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index, which weights by size and liquidity and admits large diversified technology companies. HACK charges 0.60% and CIBR charges 0.58%. This page lines up what each fund holds, how much they overlap, how each performed and what each costs, with the date next to every number.
HACK vs CIBR, the short answer
HACK and CIBR differ in what they hold and what they charge. Both are cybersecurity funds, but they follow different indexes. HACK follows the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index, a short list of 23 names with weights of roughly 2% to 6%. CIBR follows the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index, which weights by size and liquidity and admits large diversified technology companies.
Expense ratios are 0.60% and 0.58%. NAV total returns, annualized (both to Sep 30, 2026): 1 year 39.41% vs 36.26%; 3 years 33.01% vs 31.92%; 5 years 14.84% vs 16.63%; 10 years 16.21% vs 18.51%. Neither is better for everyone; the choice turns on which theme you want, how concentrated you are willing to be and what you already own.
Want the full picture of one fund before you compare? Read the complete guide for each fund: HACK guide and CIBR guide. Each guide covers fees, holdings, yield, returns and taxes.
HACK vs CIBR overlap, if you own both
HACK · ten largest holdings
As of Nov 10, 2026- 1Broadcom AVGO6.32%Both
- 2CrowdStrike CRWD5.66%Both
- 3Cisco Systems CSCO5.50%Both
- 4Palo Alto Networks PANW5.12%Both
- 5Netskope NTSK4.98%Only here
- 6Northrop Grumman NOC4.96%Only here
- 7General Dynamics GD4.94%Only here
- 8Cloudflare NET4.93%Both
- 9Rubrik RBRK4.92%Both
- 10Zscaler ZS4.53%Both
Ten largest total 51.9%
CIBR · ten largest holdings
As of Nov 9, 2026- 1CrowdStrike CRWD8.37%Both
- 2Cisco Systems CSCO7.55%Both
- 3Palo Alto Networks PANW7.32%Both
- 4Broadcom AVGO7.29%Both
- 5Fortinet FTNT6.06%Only here
- 6Okta OKTA4.09%Only here
- 7Cloudflare NET4.07%Both
- 8Zscaler ZS3.91%Both
- 9Rubrik RBRK2.84%Both
- 10Accenture ACN2.83%Only here
Ten largest total 54.3%
Shared by both · 7 companies
| Company | HACK weight | CIBR weight | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Broadcom AVGO | 6.32% | 7.29% | -0.97 pts |
| CrowdStrike CRWD | 5.66% | 8.37% | -2.71 pts |
| Cisco Systems CSCO | 5.50% | 7.55% | -2.05 pts |
| Palo Alto Networks PANW | 5.12% | 7.32% | -2.20 pts |
| Cloudflare NET | 4.93% | 4.07% | +0.86 pts |
| Rubrik RBRK | 4.92% | 2.84% | +2.08 pts |
| Zscaler ZS | 4.53% | 3.91% | +0.62 pts |
Only in HACK’s top ten: Netskope, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics. Only in CIBR’s top ten: Fortinet, Okta, Accenture.
The twist
55.1% of the weight sits in stocks both funds hold (matched by ticker in issuer holdings dated Nov 10, 2026 and Nov 9, 2026), and 7 stocks appear in both top-ten lists. The funds overlap partly, so owning both doubles up on some names while adding others.
HACK vs CIBR, one goal, which fund?
HACK vs CIBR, where the money goes
HACK · Amplify, Nov 10, 2026
CIBR · First Trust, Nov 9, 2026
HACK vs CIBR returns compared over 1, 3, 5 and 10 years
HACK vs CIBR, what each fund costs a year
The data room
Every figure behind the HACK vs CIBR cards above, with its source, date and evidence grade. Open the issuer documents before relying on any number.
HACK vs CIBR key facts
Evidence grade: Issuer issuer page · Mixed issuer plus provider · 3rd party| Metric | HACK | CIBR | Grade and source |
|---|
Portfolio characteristics
| Metric | HACK | CIBR | Grade and source |
|---|
Net assets are dated Nov 9, 2026 for both funds (HACK $3.31B; CIBR $16.36B). Figures an issuer page does not show are left out or marked Not captured, not estimated.
HACK vs CIBR holdings and top ten
Click a tile · HACK: Amplify, Nov 10, 2026 · CIBR: First Trust, Nov 9, 2026Tile area is proportional to weight.
| # | Holding | Weight |
|---|
| # | Holding | Weight |
|---|
Top ten sums: HACK 51.9% · CIBR 54.3%. 7 shared top-ten holdings. Weights change.
HACK vs CIBR sector exposure
HACK: Nov 10, 2026 · CIBR: Nov 9, 2026The sector mirror
Same funds, different lenses
Company size
HACK holds 23 stocks and CIBR holds 45. Theme funds that weight by market value lean toward very large companies, while equal-weight designs give smaller companies more say.
What you actually own
HACK vs CIBR performance
Matched dates, both to Sep 30, 2026All rows come from the issuer pages and are dated Sep 30, 2026 for both funds, so they compare like for like. NAV returns include fees; market price and index returns are shown beside them where the issuer published them. “Since inception” starts in different years (HACK 2014, CIBR 2015). Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Growth of a hypothetical $10,000 · NAV total return, both to Sep 30, 2026
Both funds derived from issuer NAV total returns on matched dates (compounded). Fund expenses are already in NAV. Illustration, not a forecast.
HACK vs CIBR yield, dividends and dividend growth
Yield and distribution facts| Measure | HACK | CIBR |
|---|---|---|
| 30-day SEC yield | Not captured | 0.05% |
| Trailing 12-month | Not captured | Not captured |
| Paid, last 12 months | Not captured | Not captured |
| Frequency | Not captured | Not captured |
Funds like these pay little income. The 30-day SEC yield was not captured for HACK and 0.05% for CIBR, and a figure near zero or below means fund costs use up most of the dividends the stocks pay. These funds are held for growth, not yield. Gaps are marked Not captured. See what is dividend yield and yield vs total return.
HACK vs CIBR concentration and overlap
Ten largest positions · shared holdingsRank by rank, the ten largest holdings of each fund. Top five: HACK 27.6%, CIBR 36.6%. Top ten: HACK 51.9%, CIBR 54.3%.
HACK vs CIBR trading and liquidity
Issuer fund pages · Nov 9, 2026The issuers report 30-day median bid/ask spreads of 0.13% for HACK and 0.07% for CIBR. A spread of 0.05% is about $50 between the buy and sell price on $100,000, and smaller funds usually cost more to trade than larger ones. Funds with many foreign holdings can also trade at a premium or discount to NAV when overseas markets are closed. Use limit orders for large trades and avoid the first and last minutes of the session. See creation, redemption and trading.
HACK vs CIBR expense ratio and fees in dollars
As stated by each issuer| Balance | HACK (0.60%) | CIBR (0.58%) | Gap per year |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10,000 | $60 | $58 | $2 |
| $50,000 | $300 | $290 | $10 |
| $100,000 | $600 | $580 | $20 |
The expense ratio is taken from fund assets, not billed to you. Fees exclude the bid/ask spread, any premium or discount to NAV, brokerage commissions and taxes.
HACK vs CIBR, how each fund picks its stocks
Index approach, in plain languageHACK · Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index
HACK tracks the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index. It holds 23 cybersecurity companies and also includes the defense contractors Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics. It was launched in 2014, and the ten largest holdings total 51.9% of the fund. Index rules and rebalance dates are in the prospectus.
CIBR · Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index
CIBR tracks the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. It holds 45 cybersecurity companies, including large networking and IT services firms such as Cisco, Broadcom and Accenture. It was launched in 2015, and the ten largest holdings total 54.3% of the fund. Index rules and rebalance dates are in the prospectus.
Exact eligibility rules, caps and rebalance dates sit in each prospectus and index methodology; read them before relying on this summary.
HACK vs CIBR, why yield and returns differ
Sector mix explains much of the gapBoth are cybersecurity funds, but they follow different indexes. HACK follows the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index, a short list of 23 names with weights of roughly 2% to 6%. CIBR follows the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index, which weights by size and liquidity and admits large diversified technology companies.
Because each index sets its own rules, the funds hold different stocks at different weights, and that explains most of the gap in returns. A fund that puts more weight in its largest companies will follow those companies closely, while an evenly weighted fund behaves more like an average of many smaller ones. Fees matter less than holdings over short periods and more over long ones.
How to decide between HACK and CIBR
A step-by-step frameworkStart with what separates them: Both are cybersecurity funds, but they follow different indexes. HACK follows the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index, a short list of 23 names with weights of roughly 2% to 6%. CIBR follows the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index, which weights by size and liquidity and admits large diversified technology companies. Then check what you already own: the funds overlap by 55.1%, so holding both is a real decision about how much of each theme you want.
- Step 1 · Theme: HACK is a cybersecurity fund and CIBR is a cybersecurity fund.
- Step 2 · Concentration: the ten largest holdings are 51.9% of HACK and 54.3% of CIBR.
- Step 3 · Cost: HACK 0.60% vs CIBR 0.58%.
- Step 4 · Overlap with your core: the largest holdings also sit in S&P 500 funds, so use the Diversification Calculator against what you own.
Size the position against your whole portfolio. Theme funds are volatile, so they usually play a small, deliberate role beside a core fund.
HACK vs CIBR for Canadian investors
Currency, withholding tax and account typeHACK and CIBR are U.S.-listed and trade in U.S. dollars, so buying them from a Canadian account usually involves converting Canadian dollars, which adds a cost on entry and exit. A move in the U.S. dollar also changes your return in Canadian dollars.
Dividends from U.S.-listed funds are generally subject to U.S. withholding tax for Canadian holders, with treatment that depends on the account type. These funds pay little income, so the effect is small, but confirm the rules for your account with a tax professional. This is general education, not tax advice.
Risks of HACK and CIBR
What can go wrongShared risks
- Theme funds are concentrated in one industry or idea, so they can fall much further than the broad market.
- Valuations can be high, and prices can drop sharply when growth or government spending expectations change.
- Returns can differ widely from one period to the next; a strong year often follows or precedes a weak one.
- Neither fund pays meaningful income, so the return depends on price.
Fund-specific risks
- HACK: ten largest holdings total 51.9% of the fund (Nov 10, 2026); 23 stocks.
- CIBR: ten largest holdings total 54.3% of the fund (Nov 9, 2026); 45 stocks.
- HACK: holds only 23 stocks, so each position matters more. CIBR: about a quarter of the fund sits in large networking and IT companies whose results depend on more than security.
- Both: the funds track indexes with their own rules, so holdings change at each rebalance.
HACK vs CIBR taxes and account placement
General education, not tax adviceBoth funds hold stocks and are taxed like other equity ETFs. Distributions are small, and gains are taxed when you sell, at rates that depend on how long you held the shares and on your own situation. Funds with foreign holdings may pay some foreign tax inside the fund.
For Canadian account types and withholding tax, see the Canadian section above. Confirm the rules for your account with a tax professional, and read how to build an ETF portfolio.
Other ETFs people compare
For context, not recommendationsInvestors comparing HACK and CIBR often also look at the other funds in this group: HACK, CIBR, BUG, ITA, XAR and PPA. See the other cybersecurity and defense ETFs comparisons, the related thematic ETFs and the ETF research hub.
HACK vs CIBR drawdown arithmetic
What a decline means in dollarsRecovery gain = decline ÷ (1 − decline). The scenarios use illustrative declines of 10%, 20% and 30% so you can see what a drop does to each fund. They are a rough guide to a bad year, not a worst-case figure. See the Position Size Calculator.
Tools to compare HACK vs CIBR
Static weights from this pageIgnores taxes, spreads and holdings differences. ETF Fee Calculator.
Check shared exposure with the Diversification Calculator.
HACK vs CIBR, which fits which job
Characteristics, not recommendationsHACK may suit investors who want…
A short cybersecurity list with some defense exposure.
Strengths
- Flatter top ten: 51.9% against 54.3%
- 23 holdings
- Exchange-traded and priced all day
Watch points
- Higher fee: 0.60% against 0.58%
- Led in 2 of 4 return windows (both to Sep 30, 2026)
- Narrow theme exposure
- Not a complete portfolio
CIBR may suit investors who want…
The largest cybersecurity fund, with big networking names.
Strengths
- Lower fee: 0.58% against 0.60%
- 45 holdings
- Exchange-traded and priced all day
Watch points
- Heavier top ten: 54.3% against 51.9%
- Led in 2 of 4 return windows (both to Sep 30, 2026)
- Narrow theme exposure
- Not a complete portfolio
HACK vs CIBR investor scenarios
Characteristics that fit, not recommendationsHACK vs CIBR key terms
Plain-language definitions
HACK vs CIBR, frequently asked questions
Answers use the figures and dates shown aboveIs HACK or CIBR better?
In the HACK vs CIBR question, neither is better for everyone. HACK and CIBR differ in what they hold and what they charge. Both are cybersecurity funds, but they follow different indexes. HACK follows the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index, a short list of 23 names with weights of roughly 2% to 6%. CIBR follows the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index, which weights by size and liquidity and admits large diversified technology companies.
Expense ratios are 0.60% and 0.58%. NAV total returns, annualized (both to Sep 30, 2026): 1 year 39.41% vs 36.26%; 3 years 33.01% vs 31.92%; 5 years 14.84% vs 16.63%; 10 years 16.21% vs 18.51%. Neither is better for everyone; the choice turns on which theme you want, how concentrated you are willing to be and what you already own.
HACK vs CIBR, what are the expense ratios?
HACK charges 0.60% and CIBR charges 0.58%, which is $60 and $58 a year per $10,000.
HACK vs CIBR, how much do the funds overlap?
On HACK vs CIBR, about 55.1% of the weight is held by both funds, matched by ticker in issuer holdings dated Nov 10, 2026 and Nov 9, 2026. 21 stocks are held by both, and 7 appear in both top-ten lists.
HACK vs CIBR, what does each ETF track?
HACK tracks the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index. CIBR tracks the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index.
HACK vs CIBR, what are the top holdings?
HACK (Nov 10, 2026): Broadcom 6.32%, CrowdStrike 5.66%, Cisco Systems 5.5%, Palo Alto Networks 5.12%, Netskope 4.98%. CIBR (Nov 9, 2026): CrowdStrike 8.37%, Cisco Systems 7.55%, Palo Alto Networks 7.32%, Broadcom 7.29%, Fortinet 6.06%.
HACK vs CIBR, which has performed better?
NAV total returns, annualized (both to Sep 30, 2026): 1 year 39.41% vs 36.26%; 3 years 33.01% vs 31.92%; 5 years 14.84% vs 16.63%; 10 years 16.21% vs 18.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
HACK vs CIBR, can I own both?
On HACK vs CIBR, you can. They overlap by about 55.1%. The funds overlap partly, so owning both doubles up on some names while adding others.
HACK vs CIBR, do the funds pay dividends?
On HACK vs CIBR, only small amounts. The 30-day SEC yield was not captured for HACK and 0.05% for CIBR, so income is not the reason to hold either fund.
HACK vs CIBR, how concentrated are the funds?
The ten largest holdings are 51.9% of HACK and 54.3% of CIBR. The largest single holding is Broadcom at 6.32% in HACK and CrowdStrike at 8.37% in CIBR.
HACK vs CIBR, are they suitable for Canadian investors?
On HACK vs CIBR, both are U.S.-listed and trade in U.S. dollars, so Canadians face currency conversion costs and U.S. withholding tax on the small dividends. Treatment differs across TFSA, RRSP and taxable accounts. This is general education, not tax advice.
HACK vs CIBR documents and sources
Open the issuer documents before relying on any figureHACK · Amplify
CIBR · First Trust
Third-party sources
Amplify HACK fund page · First Trust CIBR fund page.
Methodology and limits
- HACK figures come from the Amplify fund page and CIBR figures from the First Trust fund page.
- Dates are shown beside each figure; the issuer documents are linked below.
- Holdings overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of each ticker held by both funds, using each issuer’s full holdings list (Nov 10, 2026 and Nov 9, 2026). Cash and futures are left out.
- Industry groups on this page are assigned by this site from each stock’s main business, using one scheme for every fund, so they will not match an issuer’s own sector table.
- Figures an issuer page does not show are marked Not captured, and nothing was filled from memory or from another fund.
- Growth of $10,000 is derived from annualized NAV total returns on matched dates; dollar values are approximate.
Educational research, not personalized investment, tax or legal advice, and not a recommendation to buy or sell any fund. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Calculators are hypothetical illustrations. Fund data are provided as published by the sources named and may differ from current figures.