MTUM vs XLV Overlap
MTUM is an equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. MTUM and XLV show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 8.23%. They share 8 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by JNJ, GILD, and MCK.
Served from cache.
Quick Answer
MTUM is an equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. MTUM and XLV show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 8.23%. They share 8 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by JNJ, GILD, and MCK.
- 8.23% weighted overlap across 8 shared holdings.
- The top three shared holdings explain 81.77% of the measured overlap.
- MTUM is the broader fund, while XLV is more targeted.
- The overlap is mostly explained by the top shared positions rather than sector labels alone.
- Holding both can still add materially different exposure.
Data Freshness
- MTUM holdings
- Mar 12, 2026
- XLV 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
About These ETFs
What Stands Out In This Comparison
What This Means
MTUM is an equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. MTUM 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, GILD, and MCK.
How They Differ
MTUM is an equity ETF from IShares, while XLV is a health care sector ETF from SPDR. MTUM is the broader fund, while XLV is the more targeted sleeve. XLV has the lower expense ratio, while MTUM charges more for its exposure.
What Drives The Overlap
The overlap is driven by a relatively small set of large shared positions. The top three shared holdings account for 81.77% of the score, which means the result is heavily influenced by the biggest common weights rather than a long tail of tiny positions.
When One May Fit Better
If you want the broader portfolio building block, MTUM is usually the wider choice. If you want the more focused tilt, XLV is the narrower expression. XLV has the lower expense ratio, while MTUM charges more for its exposure.
Overlap Driver Snapshot
Concentration
The top three shared holdings explain 81.77% 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 MTUM and XLV.
| Holding | Name | MTUM Wt. | XLV Wt. | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JNJ | JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 4.55% | 10.60% | 4.55% |
| GILD | GILEAD SCIENCES INC | 1.34% | 3.33% | 1.34% |
| MCK | MCKESSON CORP | 0.83% | 2.07% | 0.83% |
| HCA | HCA HEALTHCARE INC | 0.54% | 1.55% | 0.54% |
| CAH | CARDINAL HEALTH INC | 0.37% | 0.93% | 0.37% |
| COR | CENCORA INC | 0.36% | 1.23% | 0.36% |
| IDXX | IDEXX LABORATORIES INC | 0.18% | 0.86% | 0.18% |
| BIIB | BIOGEN INC | 0.05% | 0.50% | 0.05% |
Why These ETFs Overlap
MTUM is an 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, GILD, and MCK, which appear in both portfolios and push the overlap score higher.
Holding both MTUM 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.
Related Comparisons
Frequently Asked Questions About MTUM and XLV
What is the overlap between MTUM and XLV?+
How many holdings do MTUM and XLV share?+
Is the MTUM and XLV overlap high?+
Why do MTUM and XLV overlap?+
Which ETF is broader, MTUM or XLV?+
How Overlap Is Calculated
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.