Guggenheim Investment Grade CLO ETF
GCLOGuggenheim
Guggenheim Investment Grade CLO ETF (GCLO) on the Akinda fund screen (AAOIFI-derived): Not halal. Coverage 89.74%. Below: the fund under all five rulebooks, its facts and every holding with its own verdict.
Akinda fund screen
- Halal 52.19%
- Doubtful 0.00%
- Not halal 37.55%
- Not rated 10.26%
The bar is scaled to fit; the figures are as reported, and the buckets do not always total 100%.
Coverage is the share of the fund's weight we hold a usable verdict for. Below 95%, a fund is rated only when the weight we can see already breaches the 5% limit; otherwise it is not rated by this method.
Fund facts
- Issuer
- Guggenheim
- Venue (where it trades)
- United States
- Domicile (where it is registered)
- United States
- Reporting currency
- USD
- Expense ratio
- 0.35%
- AUM
- 60.30M USD
- Holdings
- 21 (14 screened)
- Basket as of (provider)
- 3 Nov 2026
- Basket fetched by Akinda
- 3 Nov 2026
- Verdict updated
- 3 Nov 2026
Venue is where a fund trades; domicile is where it is registered. London-listed funds are domiciled in Ireland or Luxembourg, so use Venue for UK ETFs.
Five rulebooks
| Rulebook | Verdict | Halal | Not halal | Split (0–100%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Akinda fund screen (AAOIFI) | Not halal | 52.19% | 37.55% | |
| DJIM | Not halal | 52.19% | 37.55% | |
| FTSE | Not halal | 30.72% | 59.01% | |
| MSCI | Not halal | 52.19% | 37.55% | |
| S&P | Not halal | 52.19% | 37.55% |
Every bar uses the same 0–100% scale. Index rulebooks report only halal and not-halal weight; uncoloured weight is weight that rulebook does not classify. Coverage is published for the Akinda fund screen only.
The fund screen and the four index rulebooks answer different questions, so they are expected to disagree. A fund can be doubtful on our fund screen and halal under S&P; both are correct.
Holdings
1–12 of 12 holdings, largest first · basket as of 3 Nov 2026Not rated means we hold no usable verdict for that company; it is never treated as compliant.