VFMO vs VONG: 20% overlap
Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF share 20.4% 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 3 months apart — VFMO as of 2026-03-31, 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 1.8. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
VFMO and VONG hold 143 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in VFMO | in VONG | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| LRCX | 1.1% | 1.6% | 0.5% |
| AMD | 1.0% | 2.8% | 1.8% |
| KLAC | 1.0% | 1.2% | 0.2% |
| GEV | 1.1% | 0.9% | 0.2% |
| GOOGL | 0.9% | 6.2% | 5.3% |
| AMAT | 0.9% | 1.7% | 0.8% |
| CAT | 0.8% | 1.4% | 0.6% |
| MU | 0.8% | 3.9% | 3.1% |
| APH | 0.9% | 0.6% | 0.2% |
| AVGO | 0.6% | 5.2% | 4.6% |
Where VFMO and VONG 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 | VFMO | VONG | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 17.0% | 54.3% | −37.3pp |
| Health Care | 22.3% | 5.4% | +16.9pp |
| Industrials | 24.4% | 8.8% | +15.6pp |
| Communication Services | 3.4% | 16.1% | −12.7pp |
| Energy | 7.7% | 0.4% | +7.3pp |
| Materials | 6.2% | 0.3% | +5.9pp |
| Financials | 6.3% | 4.3% | +2.0pp |
| Consumer Staples | 2.4% | 1.3% | +1.1pp |
Δ is VFMO minus VONG, 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
61.0% of VFMO by weight, held in no part of VONG.
49.6% of VONG by weight, held in no part of VFMO.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| VFMO | VONG | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 10.2% | 54.3% |
| Positions held | 672 | 370 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $13 | $6 |
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 VFMO and VONG overlap?
VFMO and VONG overlap 20.4% by portfolio weight — moderate overlap. They share 143 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (VFMO as of 2026-03-31, VONG as of 2026-06-30).
How is the overlap between VFMO and VONG calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If VFMO holds a stock at 6% and VONG 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 VFMO and VONG?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 20.4% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does VFMO own that VONG doesn't?
VFMO holds 672 positions and VONG holds 370; 529 of VFMO's positions don't appear in VONG at all, and they are 61.0% of VFMO by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares VFMO and VONG. 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 VFMO vs VONG
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, VFMO as of 2026-03-31, VONG as of 2026-06-30. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.