IWD is a U.S. value equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. IWD and XLV show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 10.41%. They share 48 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by JNJ, MRK, and UNH.
Freshly computed.
Quick Answer
IWD is a U.S. value equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. IWD and XLV show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 10.41%. They share 48 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by JNJ, MRK, and UNH.
Data Freshness
Review the methodology for the overlap formula and refresh policy.
Compare another pair
IWD is a U.S. value equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. IWD and XLV do not own much of the same portfolio weight. That usually means you are combining different parts of the market, with only a small amount of duplication through names like JNJ, MRK, and UNH.
IWD is a U.S. value equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. IWD is the broader fund, while XLV is the more targeted sleeve. XLV has the lower expense ratio, while IWD charges more for its exposure.
The overlap is driven by a relatively small set of large shared positions. The top three shared holdings account for 35.83% of the score, which means the result is heavily influenced by the biggest common weights rather than a long tail of tiny positions.
If you want the broader portfolio building block, IWD is usually the wider choice. If you want the more focused tilt, XLV is the narrower expression. XLV has the lower expense ratio, while IWD charges more for its exposure.
Concentration
The top three shared holdings explain 35.83% of the full overlap score.
That helps show whether the score comes from a handful of giant shared positions or from a broader mix of common holdings.
Shared Sector Tilt
Sector tags are not consistently available for the biggest shared positions in this dataset, so this comparison leans more on the specific holdings than on sector labels.
These are the holdings contributing the most to the overlap score between IWD and XLV.
| Holding | Name | IWD Wt. | XLV Wt. | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JNJ | JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 1.94% | 11.10% | 1.94% |
| MRK | MERCK & CO., INC. | 0.98% | 5.63% | 0.98% |
| UNH | UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED | 0.81% | 4.62% | 0.81% |
| TMO | THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INCORPORATED | 0.61% | 3.48% | 0.61% |
| ABT | ABBOTT LABORATORIES | 0.58% | 3.37% | 0.58% |
| PFE | PFIZER INC. | 0.52% | 3.01% | 0.52% |
| GILD | GILEAD SCIENCES, INC. | 0.42% | 3.26% | 0.42% |
| DHR | DANAHER CORPORATION | 0.39% | 2.25% | 0.39% |
| BMY | BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY | 0.33% | 2.33% | 0.33% |
| CVS | CVS HEALTH CORPORATION | 0.30% | 1.72% | 0.30% |
IWD is a U.S. value equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. The overlap exists because both funds allocate meaningful weight to the same holdings. In this dataset, the biggest shared drivers are JNJ, MRK, and UNH, which appear in both portfolios and push the overlap score higher.
Holding both IWD and XLV can make sense if you want exposure to different sleeves of the market. The overlap is small enough that both funds may still improve diversification.
Go deeper
Portwise gives you full portfolio diagnostics — concentration risk, hidden risk scoring, drawdown analysis, and risk evolution tracking. Free to start.
Stay informed
Portfolio overlap alerts, new comparison data, and investing insights from the CG Corp team. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
A straightforward approach used by portfolio analysts.
For every stock that appears in both ETFs, we take the smaller of the two weights. Adding up all those minimums gives the total overlap percentage. A score of 100% means the two ETFs hold the exact same stocks in the same proportions.
Want the full explanation? Read the methodology page.