IWF is a U.S. growth equity ETF from IShares, while SMH is a semiconductor-focused equity ETF from VanEck. IWF and SMH show meaningful overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 21.45%. They share 13 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by NVDA, AVGO, and LRCX.
Freshly computed.
Quick Answer
IWF is a U.S. growth equity ETF from IShares, while SMH is a semiconductor-focused equity ETF from VanEck. IWF and SMH show meaningful overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 21.45%. They share 13 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by NVDA, AVGO, and LRCX.
Data Freshness
Review the methodology for the overlap formula and refresh policy.
Compare another pair
IWF is a U.S. growth equity ETF from IShares, while SMH is a semiconductor-focused equity ETF from VanEck. IWF and SMH overlap enough to matter, but they still bring different exposures to a portfolio. The overlap is concentrated in holdings such as NVDA, AVGO, and LRCX, which explains why the score lands at 21.45%.
IWF is a U.S. growth equity ETF from IShares, while SMH is a semiconductor-focused equity ETF from VanEck. IWF is the broader fund, while SMH is the more targeted sleeve. IWF has the lower expense ratio, while SMH 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 87.1% 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, IWF is usually the wider choice. If you want the more focused tilt, SMH is the narrower expression. IWF has the lower expense ratio, while SMH charges more for its exposure.
Concentration
The top three shared holdings explain 87.1% 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 IWF and SMH.
| Holding | Name | IWF Wt. | SMH Wt. | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVIDIA CORPORATION | 12.92% | 19.64% | 12.92% |
| AVGO | BROADCOM INC. | 4.79% | 7.79% | 4.79% |
| LRCX | LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION | 0.97% | 4.60% | 0.97% |
| KLAC | KLA CORPORATION | 0.70% | 4.74% | 0.70% |
| AMD | ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. | 0.69% | 4.68% | 0.69% |
| AMAT | APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. | 0.28% | 4.59% | 0.28% |
| CDNS | CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. | 0.27% | 2.43% | 0.27% |
| TXN | TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED | 0.26% | 4.61% | 0.26% |
| SNPS | SYNOPSYS, INC. | 0.20% | 2.50% | 0.20% |
| MPWR | MONOLITHIC POWER SYSTEMS, INC. | 0.18% | 1.23% | 0.18% |
IWF is a U.S. growth equity ETF from IShares, while SMH is a semiconductor-focused equity ETF from VanEck. The overlap exists because both funds allocate meaningful weight to the same holdings. In this dataset, the biggest shared drivers are NVDA, AVGO, and LRCX, which appear in both portfolios and push the overlap score higher.
Holding both IWF and SMH can still be reasonable, but you should expect some duplication. The decision comes down to whether the non-overlapping parts of each ETF are important enough for your strategy.
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.