SCHX vs VOOV: 53% overlap
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF and Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF share 53.2% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
Different holding dates. These holdings were published 30 days apart — SCHX as of 2026-05-31, the rest through 2026-06-30. 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 1.5. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
SCHX and VOOV hold 401 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in SCHX | in VOOV | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPL | 6.7% | 7.3% | 0.6% |
| AMZN | 3.9% | 3.8% | 0.1% |
| TSLA | 1.8% | 1.6% | 0.2% |
| JPM | 1.2% | 0.9% | 0.3% |
| XOM | 0.9% | 2.0% | 1.1% |
| V | 0.8% | 0.9% | 0.1% |
| JNJ | 0.8% | 0.9% | 0.1% |
| INTC | 0.8% | 2.3% | 1.5% |
| WMT | 0.7% | 1.7% | 1.0% |
| CSCO | 0.7% | 0.8% | 0.1% |
Where SCHX and VOOV 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 | SCHX | VOOV | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 36.7% | 20.5% | +16.2pp |
| Communication Services | 9.8% | 2.9% | +6.9pp |
| Financials | 10.9% | 15.3% | −4.4pp |
| Consumer Staples | 4.4% | 8.8% | −4.4pp |
| Health Care | 8.1% | 12.2% | −4.1pp |
| Unclassified | 3.7% | 0.0% | +3.7pp |
| Energy | 3.2% | 6.6% | −3.5pp |
| Industrials | 8.2% | 11.4% | −3.2pp |
Δ is SCHX minus VOOV, 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
45.4% of SCHX by weight, held in no part of VOOV.
6.1% of VOOV by weight, held in no part of SCHX.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| SCHX | VOOV | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 37.3% | 23.8% |
| Positions held | 750 | 438 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $3 | $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 SCHX and VOOV overlap?
SCHX and VOOV overlap 53.2% by portfolio weight — substantial duplication if you hold both. They share 401 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (SCHX as of 2026-05-31, VOOV as of 2026-06-30).
How is the overlap between SCHX and VOOV calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If SCHX holds a stock at 6% and VOOV 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 SCHX and VOOV?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 53.2% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does SCHX own that VOOV doesn't?
SCHX holds 750 positions and VOOV holds 438; 348 of SCHX's positions don't appear in VOOV at all, and they are 45.4% of SCHX by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares SCHX and VOOV. 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 SCHX vs VOOV
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, SCHX as of 2026-05-31, VOOV as of 2026-06-30. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.