ABALX vs IWF: 22% overlap
American Funds American Balanced A and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF share 22.2% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
Different holding dates. These holdings were published about 4 months apart — ABALX as of 2026-03-31, the rest through 2026-07-23. Each fund is compared using its most recent file, so any trading in between shows up as a difference.
You would hold two tickers and get the diversification of 1.8. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
ABALX and IWF hold 57 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in ABALX | in IWF | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGO | 3.4% | 5.7% | 2.3% |
| NVDA | 2.0% | 15.1% | 13.1% |
| MSFT | 2.0% | 4.4% | 2.4% |
| GOOGL | 1.7% | 5.7% | 4.0% |
| GOOG | 1.4% | 4.7% | 3.3% |
| LLY | 1.3% | 2.9% | 1.6% |
| MU | 1.3% | 3.5% | 2.2% |
| V | 1.0% | 1.8% | 0.8% |
| META | 0.7% | 3.4% | 2.7% |
| HD | 0.7% | 0.7% | 0.0% |
Where ABALX and IWF differ
Sector weights as a share of each fund, ordered by the size of the gap rather than the size of the sector — two funds that overlap heavily still usually diverge somewhere.
| Sector | ABALX | IWF | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 16.0% | 55.0% | −39.0pp |
| Unclassified | 22.7% | 0.0% | +22.7pp |
| Treasuries | 12.3% | 0.0% | +12.3pp |
| Communication Services | 5.1% | 15.7% | −10.6pp |
| Financials | 8.9% | 4.7% | +4.2pp |
| Corporate — industrial & other | 3.6% | 0.0% | +3.6pp |
| Consumer Staples | 4.4% | 1.3% | +3.1pp |
| MBS Pass-Through | 2.7% | 0.0% | +2.7pp |
Δ is ABALX minus IWF, in percentage points. Sector data is not published by every issuer, so “Unclassified” is a real category rather than a gap in the table.
What each fund holds alone
73.9% of ABALX by weight, held in no part of IWF.
28.5% of IWF by weight, held in no part of ABALX.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| ABALX | IWF | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 36.3% | 56.1% |
| Positions held | 1,439 | 370 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $56 | $19 |
Cost is the expense ratio applied to $10,000; it excludes any brokerage commission, bid-ask spread or tax consequence. Figures are facts about the funds, not a suggestion about which to hold.
Frequently asked
How much do ABALX and IWF overlap?
ABALX and IWF overlap 22.2% by portfolio weight — moderate overlap. They share 57 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (ABALX as of 2026-03-31, IWF as of 2026-07-23).
How is the overlap between ABALX and IWF calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If ABALX holds a stock at 6% and IWF holds the same stock at 4%, 4% counts as shared. The result is bounded between 0% and 100%, and it is computed after looking through any fund-of-funds to the underlying holdings.
Is it redundant to hold both ABALX and IWF?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 22.2% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does ABALX own that IWF doesn't?
ABALX holds 1,439 positions and IWF holds 370; 1,381 of ABALX's positions don't appear in IWF at all, and they are 73.9% of ABALX by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares ABALX and IWF. Paste your whole portfolio — brokerage, 401(k), IRA — and see the overlap across every fund at once, plus what you actually own underneath them and your own Effective Funds number. Free, no account, nothing stored.
X-ray my portfolio — free →Watch ABALX vs IWF
We re-read both funds’ published holdings every weeknight. Leave an address and we'll tell you when what's inside actually changes.
Not sending yet — email alerts are built but switched off, and you'll be among the first when they turn on. No spam, one-click unsubscribe.
Related comparisons
Sources: issuer holdings files, ABALX as of 2026-03-31, IWF as of 2026-07-23. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.