SMH vs IGV: Complete Comparison

VanEck Semiconductor ETF vs iShares Expanded Tech-Software ETF โ€” overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis

Holdings Overlap
5.00%
Very Low Overlap
Shared Holdings
2 of 25
Complete portfolio analysis
Calculation Method
Min Weight
Weighted intersection

Visual Overlap

SMH
IGV
5.0%
SMH Only
Overlap
IGV Only

Price Performance

Historical price comparison over 3M

SMH Return
+49.01%
IGV Return
+6.56%
Winner
SMH
+42.45%
Max Drawdown
SMH: -14.9%
IGV: -24.4%
SMH Volatility (annualized)36.42%
IGV Volatility (annualized)36.30%

๐Ÿ“ˆ Comparison

Metric
SMH
IGV
1 Year Return
+45.2%โœ“
+28.5%
3 Year Return
+24.5%โœ“
+10.8%
5 Year Return
+30.2%โœ“
+20.5%
Volatility
33.80%
28.50%โœ“
Expense Ratio
0.35%โœ“
0.41%
โš ๏ธ Past performance does not guarantee future results. Data may be delayed.

โš ๏ธRisk Metrics

Metric
SMH
IGV
Volatility
33.80%
28.50%โœ“
Sharpe Ratio
0.88โœ“
0.68
Sortino Ratio
1.18โœ“
0.92
Max Drawdown
-44.50%โœ“
-48.50%
Beta
1.38
1.28

Interpretation:

  • ๐Ÿ“Š Lower volatility = smoother ride
  • โšก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
  • โš ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
  • ๐Ÿ“ˆ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500

โš”๏ธ Comparison

11 - 9

๐Ÿ† SMH wins this comparison

Key Factors

๐Ÿ’ฐ Expense Ratio
SMH:0.35%โœ“
vs
IGV:0.41%โœ“
๐ŸŽฏ Number of Holdings
SMH:25 holdingsโœ“
vs
IGV:120 holdingsโœ“
๐Ÿ“ˆ 5-Year Return
SMH:+30.2%โœ“
vs
IGV:+20.5%โœ“
โ–ถAdditional Metrics (5)
โš–๏ธ Concentration Risk
SMH: 75.2% in top 10
IGV: 61.9% in top 10โœ“
๐Ÿ“Š Assets Under Management
SMH: $18Bโœ“
IGV: $9B
โšก Sharpe Ratio
SMH: 0.88โœ“
IGV: 0.68
๐Ÿ“‰ Volatility
SMH: 33.8%
IGV: 28.5%โœ“
๐Ÿ” Uniqueness vs SPY
SMH: 85.5% unique
IGV: 89.3% uniqueโœ“

Bottom line: SMH wins with better expense ratio and 5-year return. Consider SMH for your portfolio, but IGV is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.

Detailed Overlap Analysis

2 shared holdings representing 5.0% portfolio overlap

Top Shared Holdings

#StockSMH WeightIGV WeightOverlap
1
CDNS
CDNS
2.62%2.86%2.62%
2
SNPS
SNPS
2.54%2.37%2.37%

Overlap by Sector

Technology
2 stocks ยท 4.99% overlap

Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution

2
Shared Stocks
5.0%
Total Overlap
1
Sectors Represented

Top Holdings Only in SMH

Unique to SMH

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
NVDANVDA16.92%
TSMTSM9.45%
AVGOAVGO8.91%
MUMU6.58%
AMATAMAT5.97%

Top Holdings Only in IGV

Unique to IGV

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
PLTRPLTR9.86%
MSFTMSFT8.59%
CRMCRM7.29%
ORCLORCL6.23%
INTUINTU5.75%

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 holding

Normalization: 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.

๐Ÿ“Š This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.

Want deeper analysis on SMH or IGV?

Complement your EigenDex analysis with these research tools.

Some links may be affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support EigenDex as a free tool. We only recommend tools we believe provide genuine value to investors.

Compare More ETFs