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

AVLV vs XLC: how they differ

AVLV and XLC hold 7% of their weight in the same names, and AVLV returned more over the year.

Avantis U.S. Large Cap Value ETF and State Street(R) Communication Services Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, AVLV and XLC hold 7% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions AVLV and XLC both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingAVLVXLC
Meta Platforms Inc2.74%19.93%
Verizon Communications Inc1.64%4.15%
Netflix Inc0.91%4.84%
Comcast Corp0.75%4.71%
T-Mobile US Inc0.66%4.16%
Fox Corp0.16%1.26%
Fox Corp0.10%0.79%
Alphabet Inc0.06%13.10%
Paramount Skydance Corp0.04%0.38%
Alphabet Inc0.01%10.44%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in AVLVOnly in XLC
Micron Technology Inc 4.57%Take-Two Interactive Software Inc 5.26%
Amazon.com Inc 3.18%Warner Bros Discovery Inc 4.67%
Apple Inc 3.17%Electronic Arts Inc 4.64%
Exxon Mobil Corp 2.59%Walt Disney Co/The 4.49%
Caterpillar Inc 2.53%AT&T Inc 4.10%
Lam Research Corp 2.52%Live Nation Entertainment Inc 3.50%
Costco Wholesale Corp 2.06%Omnicom Group Inc 2.51%
JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.79%EchoStar Corp 1.67%

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 Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

AVLV and XLC on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
AVLV
Avantis U.S. Large Cap Value ETF
XLC
State Street(R) Communication Services Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerAvantisState Street
What it isU.S. Large Cap ValueCommunication services
Total return, 1 year+31.0%−2.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+13.5 pts−19.5 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50084.5%100.0%
Holdings27523

AVLV in plain words

AVLV is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Large Cap Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +31.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 84% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 275 positions, with the top ten at 26.9%.

XLC in plain words

XLC is an index equity fund tracking the Communication services. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −2.0% 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 23 positions, with the top ten at 76.2%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Jan 30, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, AVLV or XLC?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, AVLV returned +31.0% and XLC returned −2.0%, so AVLV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, AVLV or XLC?
AVLV charges 0.15% a year and XLC charges 0.08%, so XLC is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do AVLV and XLC overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 84% of AVLV and 100% of XLC by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 7% 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.

AVLV against XLC, 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, AVLV against XLC, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/AVLV-XLC Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources