SCHB vs XLV: 7% overlap
Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF and Health Care Select Sector SPDR Fund share 7.3% 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 — SCHB 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.
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
SCHB and XLV hold 58 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in SCHB | in XLV | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| LLY | 1.2% | 16.1% | 14.9% |
| JNJ | 0.7% | 10.7% | 10.0% |
| ABBV | 0.5% | 7.8% | 7.3% |
| UNH | 0.5% | 6.6% | 6.1% |
| MRK | 0.4% | 5.5% | 5.1% |
| TMO | 0.3% | 3.6% | 3.4% |
| AMGN | 0.2% | 3.4% | 3.2% |
| GILD | 0.2% | 2.8% | 2.6% |
| ISRG | 0.2% | 2.0% | 1.8% |
| ABT | 0.2% | 3.0% | 2.8% |
Where SCHB and XLV 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 | SCHB | XLV | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health Care | 8.4% | 99.7% | −91.3pp |
| Information Technology | 35.8% | 0.0% | +35.8pp |
| Financials | 11.1% | 0.0% | +11.1pp |
| Communication Services | 9.6% | 0.0% | +9.6pp |
| Consumer Discretionary | 9.3% | 0.0% | +9.3pp |
| Industrials | 8.8% | 0.0% | +8.8pp |
| Consumer Staples | 4.3% | 0.0% | +4.3pp |
| Unclassified | 3.5% | 0.0% | +3.5pp |
Δ is SCHB minus XLV, 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
92.6% of SCHB by weight, held in no part of XLV.
2.2% of XLV by weight, held in no part of SCHB.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| SCHB | XLV | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 34.9% | 62.0% |
| Positions held | 2,407 | 62 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $3 | $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 SCHB and XLV overlap?
SCHB and XLV overlap 7.3% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 58 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (SCHB as of 2026-05-31, XLV as of 2026-07-23).
How is the overlap between SCHB and XLV calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If SCHB holds a stock at 6% and XLV 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 SCHB and XLV?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 7.3% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does SCHB own that XLV doesn't?
SCHB holds 2,407 positions and XLV holds 62; 2,348 of SCHB's positions don't appear in XLV at all, and they are 92.6% of SCHB by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares SCHB and XLV. 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 SCHB vs XLV
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, SCHB as of 2026-05-31, XLV as of 2026-07-23. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.