EFA vs IWM: 1% overlap
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF and iShares Russell 2000 ETF share 1.2% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
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 IWM hold 22 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in EFA | in IWM | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIR | 0.6% | 0.2% | 0.5% |
| ORA | 0.2% | 0.2% | 0.0% |
| UCB | 0.2% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| MC | 0.6% | 0.1% | 0.5% |
| ACA | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.1% |
| TRN | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| FBK | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| MTX | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| SIG | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% |
| ENR | 0.6% | 0.0% | 0.6% |
Where EFA and IWM 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 | IWM | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health Care | 8.0% | 19.9% | −11.9pp |
| Financials | 25.8% | 19.0% | +6.7pp |
| Consumer Staples | 7.0% | 2.2% | +4.9pp |
| Industrials | 19.0% | 14.7% | +4.3pp |
| Real Estate | 1.6% | 5.9% | −4.3pp |
| Energy | 3.9% | 6.1% | −2.2pp |
| Materials | 5.8% | 4.2% | +1.5pp |
| Utilities | 4.5% | 3.0% | +1.4pp |
Δ is EFA minus IWM, 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
95.6% of EFA by weight, held in no part of IWM.
98.3% of IWM 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 | IWM | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 14.5% | 3.3% |
| Positions held | 678 | 1,967 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $33 | $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 EFA and IWM overlap?
EFA and IWM overlap 1.2% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 22 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (EFA as of 2026-07-23, IWM as of 2026-07-23).
How is the overlap between EFA and IWM 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 IWM 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 IWM?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 1.2% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does EFA own that IWM doesn't?
EFA holds 678 positions and IWM holds 1,967; 655 of EFA's positions don't appear in IWM at all, and they are 95.6% of EFA by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares EFA and IWM. 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 IWM
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, IWM as of 2026-07-23. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.