IVV vs XLF Overlap AnalysisOverlap
Comparing iShares Core S&P 500 ETF and Financial Select Sector SPDR Fund
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 IVV wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: IVV wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings. Consider IVV for your portfolio, but XLF is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
69 shared holdings representing 12.9% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | IVV Weight | XLF Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BRK-B BRK-B | 1.55% | 11.80% | 1.55% |
| 2 | JPM JPM | 1.50% | 10.82% | 1.50% |
| 3 | V V | 1.01% | 7.26% | 1.01% |
| 4 | MA MA | 0.80% | 5.81% | 0.80% |
| 5 | SCHW SCHW | 0.29% | 2.10% | 0.29% |
| 6 | SPGI SPGI | 0.28% | 2.01% | 0.28% |
| 7 | COF COF | 0.27% | 1.93% | 0.27% |
| 8 | BLK BLK | 0.27% | 2.02% | 0.27% |
| 9 | PGR PGR | 0.23% | 1.74% | 0.23% |
| 10 | BX BX | 0.19% | 1.51% | 0.19% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in IVV
Unique to IVV
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVDA | 7.78% |
| AAPL | AAPL | 6.81% |
| MSFT | MSFT | 6.12% |
| AMZN | AMZN | 3.82% |
| GOOGL | GOOGL | 3.10% |
Top Holdings Only in XLF
Unique to XLF
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| BAC | BAC | 4.78% |
| WFC | WFC | 3.73% |
| GS | GS | 3.47% |
| MS | MS | 2.84% |
| C | C | 2.64% |
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.