XLK vs VGT Overlap

Comparing Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund and Vanguard Information Technology ETF

Holdings Overlap
58.29%
Moderate Overlap
Shared Holdings
10 of 10
Complete portfolio analysis
Calculation Method
Min Weight
Weighted intersection

Visual Overlap

XLK
VGT
58.3%
XLK Only
Overlap
VGT Only

Price Performance

Historical price comparison over 3M

XLK Return
+12.16%
VGT Return
+11.49%
Winner
XLK
+0.66%
Max Drawdown
XLK: -10.5%
VGT: -10.7%
XLK Volatility (annualized)19.66%
VGT Volatility (annualized)19.86%

๐Ÿ“ˆ Comparison

Metric
XLK
VGT
1 Year Return
+35.2%
+34.8%
3 Year Return
+15.8%โœ“
+15.2%
5 Year Return
+25.5%โœ“
+24.8%
Volatility
24.20%
23.80%โœ“
Expense Ratio
0.10%
0.10%
โš ๏ธ Past performance does not guarantee future results. Data may be delayed.

โš ๏ธRisk Metrics

Metric
XLK
VGT
Volatility
24.20%
23.80%โœ“
Sharpe Ratio
1.05
1.02
Sortino Ratio
1.42
1.38
Max Drawdown
-38.50%
-38.20%โœ“
Beta
1.22
1.18

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

3 - 5

๐Ÿ† VGT wins this comparison

Key Factors

๐Ÿ’ฐ Expense Ratio
XLK:0.10%
vs
VGT:0.10%
๐ŸŽฏ Number of Holdings
XLK:65 holdingsโœ“
vs
VGT:329 holdingsโœ“
๐Ÿ“ˆ 5-Year Return
XLK:+25.5%
vs
VGT:+24.8%
โ–ถAdditional Metrics (5)
โš–๏ธ Concentration Risk
XLK: 62.3% in top 10โœ“
VGT: 76.5% in top 10
๐Ÿ“Š Assets Under Management
XLK: $55B โœ“
VGT: $70B โœ“
โšก Sharpe Ratio
XLK: 1.05
VGT: 1.02
๐Ÿ“‰ Volatility
XLK: 24.2%
VGT: 23.8%
๐Ÿ” Uniqueness vs SPY
XLK: 65.5% unique
VGT: 73.9% uniqueโœ“

Bottom line: VGT wins with better number of holdings. Both have the same expense ratio, so cost isn't a differentiator. Consider VGT for your portfolio, but XLK is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.

Detailed Overlap Analysis

10 shared holdings representing 58.3% portfolio overlap

Top Shared Holdings

#StockXLK WeightVGT WeightOverlap
1
NVDA
NVDA
14.84%15.45%14.84%
2
AAPL
AAPL
13.10%20.85%13.10%
3
MSFT
MSFT
11.75%19.65%11.75%
4
AVGO
AVGO
5.36%4.75%4.75%
5
AMD
AMD
2.96%2.85%2.85%
6
ORCL
ORCL
2.81%2.75%2.75%
7
CSCO
CSCO
2.60%2.35%2.35%
8
CRM
CRM
2.13%3.15%2.13%
9
ACN
ACN
1.42%2.15%1.42%
10
ADBE
ADBE
1.25%2.55%1.25%

Overlap by Sector

Technology
9 stocks ยท 55.77% overlap
Other
1 stocks ยท 1.42% overlap

Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution

10
Shared Stocks
58.3%
Total Overlap
2
Sectors Represented

Top Holdings Only in XLK

Unique to XLK

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
PLTRPLTR3.75%
MUMU2.72%
IBMIBM2.41%
LRCXLRCX1.88%
AMATAMAT1.76%

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.

Compare More ETFs