ITOT vs IWM Overlap AnalysisOverlap
Comparing iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF and iShares Russell 2000 ETF
Visual Overlap
Price Performance
Historical price comparison over 3M
๐Performance Comparison
โ ๏ธRisk Metrics
Interpretation:
- ๐ Lower volatility = smoother ride
- โก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
- โ ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
- ๐ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500
โ๏ธHead-to-Head Comparison
๐ ITOT wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: ITOT wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings and 5-year return. Consider ITOT for your portfolio, but IWM is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
188 shared holdings representing 2.9% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | ITOT Weight | IWM Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BE BE | 0.05% | 0.80% | 0.05% |
| 2 | OKLO OKLO | 0.04% | 0.39% | 0.04% |
| 3 | RMBS RMBS | 0.04% | 0.39% | 0.04% |
| 4 | IONQ IONQ | 0.04% | 0.51% | 0.04% |
| 5 | CRDO CRDO | 0.04% | 0.86% | 0.04% |
| 6 | RGTI RGTI | 0.04% | 0.31% | 0.04% |
| 7 | AVAV AVAV | 0.04% | 0.31% | 0.04% |
| 8 | MGY MGY | 0.03% | 0.15% | 0.03% |
| 9 | MARA MARA | 0.03% | 0.16% | 0.03% |
| 10 | TDS TDS | 0.03% | 0.13% | 0.03% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in ITOT
Unique to ITOT
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVDA | 7.33% |
| AAPL | AAPL | 6.04% |
| MSFT | MSFT | 5.68% |
| AMZN | AMZN | 3.64% |
| GOOGL | GOOGL | 2.55% |
Top Holdings Only in IWM
Unique to IWM
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NXT | NEXTPOWER INC CLASS A | 0.44% |
| SATS | ECHOSTAR CORP CLASS A | 0.43% |
| CDE | COEUR MINING INC | 0.35% |
| ENSG | ENSIGN GROUP INC | 0.34% |
| DY | DYCOM INDUSTRIES INC | 0.33% |
Price Correlation
How We Calculate Overlap
We use the minimum weight method with normalization to calculate portfolio overlap:
Overlap = ฮฃ min(weightA, weightB) for each shared holdingNormalization: Holdings weights are normalized to sum to 100% before comparison. This ensures accurate overlap calculations even when analyzing partial holdings data (e.g., top 50 positions).
Conservative approach: We consider only the smaller allocation for each shared position, giving you a realistic view of true portfolio overlap.
๐ This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.