VT vs XLF Overlap
VT is an equity ETF from Vanguard, while XLF is a financial sector ETF from SPDR. VT and XLF show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 6.82%. They share 75 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by JPM, BRK-B, and V.
Served from cache.
Quick Answer
VT is an equity ETF from Vanguard, while XLF is a financial sector ETF from SPDR. VT and XLF show limited overlap, with an estimated weighted overlap of 6.82%. They share 75 holdings in the loaded dataset, led by JPM, BRK-B, and V.
- 6.82% weighted overlap across 75 shared holdings.
- The top three shared holdings explain 28.48% of the measured overlap.
- VT is the broader fund, while XLF 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
- VT holdings
- Mar 12, 2026
- XLF 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
VT is an equity ETF from Vanguard, while XLF is a financial sector ETF from SPDR. VT and XLF 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 JPM, BRK-B, and V.
How They Differ
VT is an equity ETF from Vanguard, while XLF is a financial sector ETF from SPDR. VT is the broader fund, while XLF is the more targeted sleeve. VT has the lower expense ratio, while XLF 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 28.48% 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, VT is usually the wider choice. If you want the more focused tilt, XLF is the narrower expression. VT has the lower expense ratio, while XLF charges more for its exposure.
Overlap Driver Snapshot
Concentration
The top three shared holdings explain 28.48% 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 VT and XLF.
| Holding | Name | VT Wt. | XLF Wt. | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPM | JPMorgan Chase & Co | 0.73% | 10.99% | 0.73% |
| BRK-B | Berkshire Hathaway Inc | 0.71% | 12.67% | 0.71% |
| V | Visa Inc | 0.50% | 7.42% | 0.50% |
| MA | Mastercard Inc | 0.40% | 5.90% | 0.40% |
| BAC | Bank of America Corp | 0.32% | 4.56% | 0.32% |
| WFC | Wells Fargo & Co | 0.26% | 3.44% | 0.26% |
| GS | Goldman Sachs Group Inc/The | 0.24% | 3.50% | 0.24% |
| MS | Morgan Stanley | 0.19% | 2.71% | 0.19% |
| C | Citigroup Inc | 0.18% | 2.73% | 0.18% |
| AXP | American Express Co | 0.17% | 2.28% | 0.17% |
Why These ETFs Overlap
VT is an equity ETF from Vanguard, while XLF is a financial 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 JPM, BRK-B, and V, which appear in both portfolios and push the overlap score higher.
Holding both VT and XLF 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 VT and XLF
What is the overlap between VT and XLF?+
How many holdings do VT and XLF share?+
Is the VT and XLF overlap high?+
Why do VT and XLF overlap?+
Which ETF is broader, VT or XLF?+
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.