IWR vs SCHV Overlap

IWR is a mid-cap U.S. equity ETF from IShares, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF from Schwab. IWR and SCHV show meaningful overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 28.6%. They share 391 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by GLW, HWM, and WDC.

28.6% overlap
#
391Shared Holdings
OK
Moderate Overlap

Served from cache.

Quick Answer

IWR is a mid-cap U.S. equity ETF from IShares, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF from Schwab. IWR and SCHV show meaningful overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 28.6%. They share 391 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by GLW, HWM, and WDC.

  • 28.6% weighted overlap across 391 shared holdings.
  • The top three shared holdings explain 3.67% of the measured overlap.
  • SCHV is the broader fund, while IWR is more targeted.
  • The overlap is mostly explained by the top shared positions rather than sector labels alone.
  • Holding both may add less diversification than the fund names imply.

Data Freshness

IWR holdings
Mar 12, 2026
SCHV holdings
Mar 12, 2026
Overlap computed
Mar 15, 2026
Data source
Financial Modeling Prep

Review the methodology for the overlap formula and refresh policy.

Compare another pair

vs

About These ETFs

ETF A

IWR

iShares Russell Mid-Cap ETF

Issuer
IShares
Asset class
Equity
Expense ratio
0.18%
AUM
$48B
Inception
Jul 17, 2001

ETF B

SCHV

Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF

Issuer
Schwab
Asset class
Equity
Expense ratio
0.04%
AUM
$15B
Inception
Dec 11, 2009

What Stands Out In This Comparison

01

What This Means

IWR is a mid-cap U.S. equity ETF from IShares, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF from Schwab. IWR and SCHV overlap enough to matter, but they still bring different exposures to a portfolio. The overlap is concentrated in holdings such as GLW, HWM, and WDC, which explains why the score lands at 28.6%.

02

How They Differ

IWR is a mid-cap U.S. equity ETF from IShares, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF from Schwab. SCHV is the broader fund, while IWR is the more targeted sleeve. SCHV has the lower expense ratio, while IWR charges more for its exposure.

03

What Drives The Overlap

The overlap is driven by a relatively small set of large shared positions. The top three shared holdings account for 3.67% of the score, which means the result is heavily influenced by the biggest common weights rather than a long tail of tiny positions.

04

When One May Fit Better

If you want the broader portfolio building block, SCHV is usually the wider choice. If you want the more focused tilt, IWR is the narrower expression. SCHV has the lower expense ratio, while IWR charges more for its exposure.

Overlap Driver Snapshot

Concentration

The top three shared holdings explain 3.67% 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.

Top Shared Holdings

These are the holdings contributing the most to the overlap score between IWR and SCHV.

HoldingIWR Wt.SCHV Wt.Overlap
GLW0.83%0.37%0.37%
HWM0.79%0.36%0.36%
WDC0.70%0.32%0.32%
BK0.63%0.28%0.28%
CMI0.60%0.27%0.27%
ROST0.53%0.24%0.24%
WBD0.50%0.24%0.24%
COR0.50%0.24%0.24%
LHX0.53%0.24%0.24%
VLO0.51%0.23%0.23%

Why These ETFs Overlap

IWR is a mid-cap U.S. equity ETF from IShares, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF from Schwab. The overlap exists because both funds allocate meaningful weight to the same holdings. In this dataset, the biggest shared drivers are GLW, HWM, and WDC, which appear in both portfolios and push the overlap score higher.

Holding both IWR and SCHV 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.

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions About IWR and SCHV

What is the overlap between IWR and SCHV?+
IWR and SCHV currently show an estimated weighted overlap of 28.6% based on the loaded holdings data.
How many holdings do IWR and SCHV share?+
They share 391 holdings in the current dataset.
Is the IWR and SCHV overlap high?+
The current verdict is Moderate Overlap. That means the two ETFs have noticeable duplication in portfolio weight.
Why do IWR and SCHV overlap?+
IWR and SCHV overlap because the same large positions appear in both funds. In this comparison, the top three shared holdings explain 3.67% of the measured overlap score.
Which ETF is broader, IWR or SCHV?+
SCHV is the broader fund, while IWR is the more targeted sleeve. That does not automatically make one better, but it helps explain why the pair can overlap while still serving different roles.

How Overlap Is Calculated

A straightforward approach used by portfolio analysts.

Overlap = sum(min(Weight_A, Weight_B)) for each shared holding

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.

Looking for another pair? Start from the homepage or open the canonical URL for this comparison at /compare/IWR-SCHV.