Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

ACWI vs XLV: how they differ

ACWI and XLV hold 5% of their weight in the same names, and XLV returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF and State Street(R) Health Care Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ACWI and XLV hold 5% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ACWI and XLV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingACWIXLV
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY0.76%16.56%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON0.56%10.67%
ABBVIE INC.0.38%7.76%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED0.34%6.59%
MERCK & CO., INC.0.27%5.54%
AMGEN INC.0.19%3.41%
THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INCORPORATED0.18%3.25%
GILEAD SCIENCES, INC.0.16%2.74%
INTUITIVE SURGICAL, INC.0.16%2.46%
ABBOTT LABORATORIES0.16%2.76%
PFIZER INC.0.15%2.40%
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY0.12%2.05%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ACWIOnly in XLV
NVIDIA CORPORATION 4.89%Medtronic PLC 1.75%
APPLE INC. 4.02%Moderna Inc 0.43%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 2.90%STERIS PLC 0.36%
AMAZON.COM, INC. 2.58%Viatris Inc 0.32%
ALPHABET INC. 2.26%Revvity Inc 0.22%
BROADCOM INC. 1.90%Align Technology Inc 0.20%
ALPHABET INC. 1.87%Bio-Techne Corp 0.19%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa 1.73%Baxter International Inc 0.19%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.

ACWI and XLV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
XLV
State Street(R) Health Care Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesState Street
What it isMSCI ACWIHealth care
Total return, 1 year+19.1%+20.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.6 pts+2.9 pts
Expense ratio0.32%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50061.4%100.0%
Holdings230759

ACWI in plain words

ACWI is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI ACWI. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.32% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 61% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2307 positions, with the top ten at 24.6%.

XLV in plain words

XLV is an index equity fund tracking the Health care. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +20.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 59 positions, with the top ten at 61.7%. It sat 5.9% below its high of Aug 19, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ACWI or XLV?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ACWI returned +19.1% and XLV returned +20.4%, so XLV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ACWI or XLV?
ACWI charges 0.32% a year and XLV charges 0.08%, so XLV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ACWI and XLV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 61% of ACWI and 100% of XLV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 5% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

ACWI against XLV, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACWI against XLV, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ACWI-XLV Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources