PRWCX vs SCHX: 29% overlap
T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF share 28.5% 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 — PRWCX as of 2026-03-31, the rest through 2026-05-31. 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 1.7. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
PRWCX and SCHX hold 41 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in PRWCX | in SCHX | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFT | 4.2% | 4.9% | 0.6% |
| AMZN | 4.8% | 3.9% | 0.9% |
| AAPL | 3.6% | 6.7% | 3.1% |
| NVDA | 3.0% | 7.5% | 4.5% |
| GOOGL | 2.3% | 3.2% | 1.0% |
| META | 3.7% | 2.0% | 1.7% |
| AVGO | 1.8% | 3.1% | 1.3% |
| AMD | 1.4% | 1.2% | 0.1% |
| LLY | 0.8% | 1.3% | 0.4% |
| JPM | 0.7% | 1.2% | 0.5% |
Where PRWCX and SCHX 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 | PRWCX | SCHX | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 17.8% | 36.8% | −19.0pp |
| Treasuries | 18.2% | 0.0% | +18.2pp |
| Unclassified | 20.3% | 3.4% | +16.8pp |
| Financials | 2.4% | 10.9% | −8.5pp |
| Industrials | 0.9% | 8.2% | −7.3pp |
| Utilities | 7.1% | 2.0% | +5.1pp |
| Cash & Other | 5.0% | 0.0% | +5.0pp |
| Health Care | 12.2% | 8.1% | +4.1pp |
Δ is PRWCX minus SCHX, 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
45.1% of PRWCX by weight, held in no part of SCHX.
57.5% of SCHX by weight, held in no part of PRWCX.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| PRWCX | SCHX | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 46.0% | 37.3% |
| Positions held | 151 | 750 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $72 | $3 |
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 PRWCX and SCHX overlap?
PRWCX and SCHX overlap 28.5% by portfolio weight — moderate overlap. They share 41 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (PRWCX as of 2026-03-31, SCHX as of 2026-05-31).
How is the overlap between PRWCX and SCHX calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If PRWCX holds a stock at 6% and SCHX 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 PRWCX and SCHX?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 28.5% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does PRWCX own that SCHX doesn't?
PRWCX holds 151 positions and SCHX holds 750; 109 of PRWCX's positions don't appear in SCHX at all, and they are 45.1% of PRWCX by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares PRWCX and SCHX. 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 PRWCX vs SCHX
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, PRWCX as of 2026-03-31, SCHX as of 2026-05-31. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.