SCHG vs SCHV Overlap
Both funds come from Schwab. SCHG is a U.S. growth equity ETF, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF. SCHG and SCHV show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 0.04%. They share 2 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by GVMXX and USD.
Served from cache.
Quick Answer
Both funds come from Schwab. SCHG is a U.S. growth equity ETF, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF. SCHG and SCHV show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 0.04%. They share 2 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by GVMXX and USD.
- 0.04% weighted overlap across 2 shared holdings.
- The top three shared holdings explain 100% of the measured overlap.
- SCHG and SCHV are closer in breadth than a broad-vs-niche ETF pair.
- 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
- SCHG 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
About These ETFs
What Stands Out In This Comparison
What This Means
Both funds come from Schwab. SCHG is a U.S. growth equity ETF, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF. SCHG and SCHV 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 GVMXX and USD.
How They Differ
Both funds come from Schwab. SCHG is a U.S. growth equity ETF, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF. Neither fund clearly dominates on breadth, so the practical difference is more about weighting, index construction, and cost. SCHG and SCHV are priced very similarly on expense ratio.
What Drives The Overlap
The overlap is driven by a relatively small set of large shared positions. The top three shared holdings account for 100% 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
Because SCHG and SCHV are closer in breadth, the better fit usually comes down to index methodology, issuer preference, and cost. SCHG and SCHV are priced very similarly on expense ratio.
Overlap Driver Snapshot
Concentration
The top three shared holdings explain 100% 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 SCHG and SCHV.
| Holding | Name | SCHG Wt. | SCHV Wt. | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GVMXX | SSC GOVERNMENT MM GVMXX | 0.04% | 0.03% | 0.03% |
| USD | US DOLLAR | 0.01% | 0.02% | 0.01% |
Why These ETFs Overlap
Both funds come from Schwab. SCHG is a U.S. growth equity ETF, while SCHV is a U.S. value equity ETF. The overlap exists because both funds allocate meaningful weight to the same holdings. In this dataset, the biggest shared drivers are GVMXX and USD, which appear in both portfolios and push the overlap score higher.
Holding both SCHG and SCHV 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 SCHG and SCHV
What is the overlap between SCHG and SCHV?+
How many holdings do SCHG and SCHV share?+
Is the SCHG and SCHV overlap high?+
Why do SCHG and SCHV overlap?+
Which ETF is broader, SCHG or SCHV?+
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.