SCHB vs IWM Overlap AnalysisOverlap
Comparing Schwab U.S. Broad 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 SCHB wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: SCHB wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings and 5-year return. Consider SCHB for your portfolio, but IWM is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
203 shared holdings representing 2.6% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | SCHB Weight | IWM Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HIMS HIMS | 0.04% | 0.26% | 0.04% |
| 2 | IBP IBP | 0.03% | 0.21% | 0.03% |
| 3 | SIGI SIGI | 0.03% | 0.17% | 0.03% |
| 4 | SHAK SHAK | 0.03% | 0.11% | 0.03% |
| 5 | CRDO CRDO | 0.03% | 0.86% | 0.03% |
| 6 | FLG FLG | 0.02% | 0.13% | 0.02% |
| 7 | UPST UPST | 0.02% | 0.13% | 0.02% |
| 8 | VLY VLY | 0.02% | 0.19% | 0.02% |
| 9 | PI PI | 0.02% | 0.14% | 0.02% |
| 10 | IRT IRT | 0.02% | 0.13% | 0.02% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in SCHB
Unique to SCHB
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVDA | 7.17% |
| MSFT | MSFT | 6.47% |
| AAPL | AAPL | 5.00% |
| AMZN | AMZN | 3.33% |
| META | META | 2.73% |
Top Holdings Only in IWM
Unique to IWM
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| MDGL | MADRIGAL PHARMACEUTICALS INC | 0.35% |
| DY | DYCOM INDUSTRIES INC | 0.33% |
| QBTS | D WAVE QUANTUM INC | 0.30% |
| UMBF | UMB FINANCIAL CORP | 0.29% |
| ARWR | ARROWHEAD PHARMACEUTICALS INC | 0.28% |
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.