AWSHX vs IWF: 33% overlap
American Funds Washington Mutual A and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF share 32.9% 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 3 months apart — AWSHX as of 2026-04-30, 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 1.7. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
AWSHX and IWF hold 65 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in AWSHX | in IWF | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGO | 7.5% | 5.7% | 1.8% |
| MSFT | 4.6% | 4.4% | 0.2% |
| AAPL | 2.4% | 7.8% | 5.4% |
| GOOGL | 2.0% | 5.7% | 3.7% |
| NVDA | 1.6% | 15.1% | 13.5% |
| LLY | 1.6% | 2.9% | 1.3% |
| GOOG | 1.5% | 4.7% | 3.1% |
| META | 1.4% | 3.4% | 2.0% |
| V | 1.3% | 1.8% | 0.5% |
| GE | 1.2% | 1.1% | 0.0% |
Where AWSHX 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 | AWSHX | IWF | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 21.9% | 55.0% | −33.1pp |
| Financials | 15.0% | 4.7% | +10.3pp |
| Communication Services | 6.1% | 15.7% | −9.6pp |
| Unclassified | 7.9% | 0.0% | +7.9pp |
| Consumer Staples | 7.0% | 1.3% | +5.7pp |
| Health Care | 10.7% | 5.6% | +5.1pp |
| Utilities | 3.8% | 0.3% | +3.4pp |
| Industrials | 11.7% | 8.5% | +3.2pp |
Δ is AWSHX 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
52.2% of AWSHX by weight, held in no part of IWF.
31.6% of IWF by weight, held in no part of AWSHX.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| AWSHX | IWF | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 29.9% | 56.1% |
| Positions held | 197 | 370 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $57 | $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 AWSHX and IWF overlap?
AWSHX and IWF overlap 32.9% by portfolio weight — moderate overlap. They share 65 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (AWSHX as of 2026-04-30, IWF as of 2026-07-23).
How is the overlap between AWSHX and IWF calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If AWSHX 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 AWSHX and IWF?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 32.9% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does AWSHX own that IWF doesn't?
AWSHX holds 197 positions and IWF holds 370; 132 of AWSHX's positions don't appear in IWF at all, and they are 52.2% of AWSHX by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares AWSHX 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 AWSHX 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, AWSHX as of 2026-04-30, IWF as of 2026-07-23. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.