EFA vs FZROX: 1% overlap
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF and Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index share 0.8% 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 — FZROX 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 2.0. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
EFA and FZROX hold 37 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in EFA | in FZROX | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| MRK | 0.1% | 0.4% | 0.3% |
| ALL | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| ROP | 1.4% | 0.1% | 1.3% |
| EQT | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| ADM | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| HBAN | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| PRU | 0.2% | 0.0% | 0.1% |
| SUNB | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.1% |
| DTE | 0.5% | 0.0% | 0.4% |
| CASH | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.6% |
Where EFA and FZROX 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 | EFA | FZROX | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 12.0% | 32.3% | −20.3pp |
| Financials | 25.8% | 11.8% | +14.0pp |
| Industrials | 19.0% | 9.2% | +9.8pp |
| Communication Services | 3.1% | 10.1% | −7.0pp |
| Materials | 5.8% | 1.6% | +4.2pp |
| Unclassified | 0.0% | 3.8% | −3.8pp |
| Consumer Staples | 7.0% | 4.6% | +2.4pp |
| Utilities | 4.5% | 2.3% | +2.2pp |
Δ is EFA minus FZROX, 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
92.3% of EFA by weight, held in no part of FZROX.
98.4% of FZROX by weight, held in no part of EFA.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| EFA | FZROX | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 14.5% | 34.0% |
| Positions held | 678 | 2,685 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $33 | $0 |
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 EFA and FZROX overlap?
EFA and FZROX overlap 0.8% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 37 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (EFA as of 2026-07-23, FZROX as of 2026-04-30).
How is the overlap between EFA and FZROX calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If EFA holds a stock at 6% and FZROX 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 EFA and FZROX?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 0.8% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does EFA own that FZROX doesn't?
EFA holds 678 positions and FZROX holds 2,685; 640 of EFA's positions don't appear in FZROX at all, and they are 92.3% of EFA by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares EFA and FZROX. 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 EFA vs FZROX
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, EFA as of 2026-07-23, FZROX as of 2026-04-30. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.