FSKAX vs IEFA: 1% overlap
Fidelity Total Market Index and iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF share 1.2% 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 5 months apart — FSKAX as of 2026-02-28, 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
FSKAX and IEFA hold 124 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in FSKAX | in IEFA | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALL | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| MRK | 0.5% | 0.1% | 0.4% |
| EQT | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| ROP | 0.1% | 1.2% | 1.1% |
| PRU | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.1% |
| DG | 0.1% | 0.3% | 0.2% |
| HBAN | 0.1% | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| ADM | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| DTE | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.4% |
| TSCO | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% |
Where FSKAX and IEFA 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 | FSKAX | IEFA | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 29.9% | 11.9% | +18.0pp |
| Financials | 12.2% | 24.2% | −12.0pp |
| Industrials | 9.6% | 19.6% | −10.0pp |
| Communication Services | 9.7% | 3.2% | +6.5pp |
| Materials | 1.8% | 6.4% | −4.6pp |
| Unclassified | 4.0% | 0.0% | +4.0pp |
| Health Care | 9.8% | 7.6% | +2.2pp |
| Utilities | 2.4% | 4.2% | −1.8pp |
Δ is FSKAX minus IEFA, 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
96.2% of FSKAX by weight, held in no part of IEFA.
92.5% of IEFA by weight, held in no part of FSKAX.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| FSKAX | IEFA | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 32.1% | 12.5% |
| Positions held | 3,754 | 2,567 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $1 | $7 |
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 FSKAX and IEFA overlap?
FSKAX and IEFA overlap 1.2% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 124 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (FSKAX as of 2026-02-28, IEFA as of 2026-07-23).
How is the overlap between FSKAX and IEFA calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If FSKAX holds a stock at 6% and IEFA 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 FSKAX and IEFA?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 1.2% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does FSKAX own that IEFA doesn't?
FSKAX holds 3,754 positions and IEFA holds 2,567; 3,629 of FSKAX's positions don't appear in IEFA at all, and they are 96.2% of FSKAX by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares FSKAX and IEFA. 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 FSKAX vs IEFA
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, FSKAX as of 2026-02-28, IEFA as of 2026-07-23. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.