SCHG vs XLY: 12% overlap
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF and Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR Fund share 11.9% 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.
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
SCHG and XLY hold 16 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in SCHG | in XLY | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMZN | 5.7% | 23.5% | 17.8% |
| TSLA | 3.9% | 16.1% | 12.2% |
| BKNG | 0.5% | 3.6% | 3.1% |
| MAR | 0.3% | 2.1% | 1.9% |
| HLT | 0.3% | 2.0% | 1.7% |
| ORLY | 0.3% | 1.9% | 1.7% |
| DASH | 0.2% | 1.7% | 1.5% |
| ABNB | 0.2% | 1.5% | 1.3% |
| CVNA | 0.2% | 1.2% | 1.0% |
| AZO | 0.2% | 1.3% | 1.1% |
Where SCHG and XLY 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 | SCHG | XLY | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer Discretionary | 12.1% | 99.9% | −87.8pp |
| Information Technology | 46.1% | 0.0% | +46.1pp |
| Communication Services | 14.7% | 0.0% | +14.7pp |
| Health Care | 8.3% | 0.0% | +8.3pp |
| Financials | 6.8% | 0.0% | +6.8pp |
| Industrials | 6.0% | 0.0% | +6.0pp |
| Unclassified | 1.9% | 0.0% | +1.9pp |
| Consumer Staples | 1.7% | 0.0% | +1.7pp |
Δ is SCHG minus XLY, 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
88.0% of SCHG by weight, held in no part of XLY.
43.0% of XLY by weight, held in no part of SCHG.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| SCHG | XLY | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 57.2% | 68.0% |
| Positions held | 195 | 49 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $4 | $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 SCHG and XLY overlap?
SCHG and XLY overlap 11.9% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 16 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (SCHG as of 2026-05-31, XLY as of 2026-07-23).
How is the overlap between SCHG and XLY calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If SCHG holds a stock at 6% and XLY 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 SCHG and XLY?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 11.9% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does SCHG own that XLY doesn't?
SCHG holds 195 positions and XLY holds 49; 178 of SCHG's positions don't appear in XLY at all, and they are 88.0% of SCHG by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares SCHG and XLY. 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 SCHG vs XLY
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, SCHG as of 2026-05-31, XLY as of 2026-07-23. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.