EFA vs SCHG: 0% overlap

iShares MSCI EAFE ETF and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF share 0.4% 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 2 months apart — SCHG as of 2026-05-31, 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.

Hold both, 50/50
2.0Effective Funds

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.

Overlap
0.4%
EFA expense ratio
0.33%
SCHG expense ratio
0.04%

Top shared holdings

EFA and SCHG hold 5 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:

Holdingin EFAin SCHGΔ
ROP1.4%0.1%1.3%
HEI0.1%0.1%0.0%
CSL0.2%0.0%0.1%
CASH0.0%0.1%0.0%
AAL0.2%0.0%0.2%

Where EFA and SCHG 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.

SectorEFASCHGΔ
Information Technology12.0%46.1%34.1pp
Financials25.8%6.8%+19.0pp
Industrials19.0%6.0%+13.0pp
Communication Services3.1%14.7%11.6pp
Consumer Staples7.0%1.7%+5.3pp
Materials5.8%0.6%+5.1pp
Utilities4.5%0.4%+4.1pp
Consumer Discretionary8.3%12.1%3.8pp

Δ is EFA minus SCHG, 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

Only in EFA
672 positions

97.6% of EFA by weight, held in no part of SCHG.

Only in SCHG
189 positions

99.6% of SCHG 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

EFASCHG
Top 10 holdings14.5%57.2%
Positions held678195
Cost per $10,000 held, per year$33$4

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 SCHG overlap?

EFA and SCHG overlap 0.4% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 5 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (EFA as of 2026-07-23, SCHG as of 2026-05-31).

How is the overlap between EFA and SCHG 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 SCHG 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 SCHG?

That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 0.4% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.

What does EFA own that SCHG doesn't?

EFA holds 678 positions and SCHG holds 195; 672 of EFA's positions don't appear in SCHG at all, and they are 97.6% of EFA by weight.

You probably hold more than two funds

This page compares EFA and SCHG. 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 SCHG

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, SCHG as of 2026-05-31. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.