EFA vs VTHRX: 12% overlap
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF and Vanguard Target Retirement 2030 share 12.1% 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 — VTHRX 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 1.9. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
EFA and VTHRX hold 650 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in EFA | in VTHRX | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASML | 3.2% | 0.4% | 2.8% |
| HSBA | 1.6% | 0.2% | 1.4% |
| ROP | 1.4% | 0.2% | 1.2% |
| SAN | 1.3% | 0.2% | 1.2% |
| NOVN | 1.3% | 0.2% | 1.2% |
| AZN | 1.2% | 0.2% | 1.0% |
| NESN | 1.2% | 0.1% | 1.0% |
| SU | 0.8% | 0.1% | 0.6% |
| SIE | 1.0% | 0.1% | 0.9% |
| SHEL | 1.2% | 0.1% | 1.0% |
Where EFA and VTHRX 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 | VTHRX | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Financials | 25.8% | 11.3% | +14.4pp |
| Treasuries | 0.0% | 13.6% | −13.6pp |
| Unclassified | 0.0% | 13.3% | −13.3pp |
| Industrials | 19.0% | 6.9% | +12.1pp |
| MBS Pass-Through | 0.0% | 5.7% | −5.7pp |
| Information Technology | 12.0% | 17.3% | −5.3pp |
| Corporate — industrial & other | 0.0% | 4.4% | −4.4pp |
| Consumer Staples | 7.0% | 2.7% | +4.3pp |
Δ is EFA minus VTHRX, 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
1.9% of EFA by weight, held in no part of VTHRX.
85.8% of VTHRX 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 | VTHRX | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 14.5% | 28.9% |
| Positions held | 678 | 7 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $33 | $8 |
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 VTHRX overlap?
EFA and VTHRX overlap 12.1% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 650 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (EFA as of 2026-07-23, VTHRX as of 2026-03-31).
How is the overlap between EFA and VTHRX 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 VTHRX 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 VTHRX?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 12.1% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does EFA own that VTHRX doesn't?
EFA holds 678 positions and VTHRX holds 7; 27 of EFA's positions don't appear in VTHRX at all, and they are 1.9% of EFA by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares EFA and VTHRX. 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 VTHRX
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, VTHRX as of 2026-03-31. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.