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

AVUS vs ITOT: how they differ

AVUS and ITOT hold 72% of their weight in the same names, and AVUS returned more over the year.

Avantis U.S. Equity ETF and iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, AVUS and ITOT hold 72% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions AVUS and ITOT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingAVUSITOT
NVIDIA Corp5.49%6.64%
Apple Inc5.37%5.82%
Microsoft Corp3.85%3.80%
Amazon.com Inc3.68%3.20%
Alphabet Inc2.42%2.87%
Alphabet Inc1.94%2.29%
Micron Technology Inc2.40%1.78%
Meta Platforms Inc2.21%1.70%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.20%1.20%
Broadcom Inc1.18%2.45%
Eli Lilly & Co0.84%1.30%
Tesla Inc0.80%1.62%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in AVUSOnly in ITOT
Flex Ltd 0.28%Philip Morris International, Inc. 0.39%
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd 0.25%Linde plc 0.33%
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.23%Seagate Technology Holdings plc 0.30%
Linde PLC 0.20%Eaton Corp. plc 0.23%
Chubb Ltd 0.19%Welltower, Inc. 0.22%
TechnipFMC PLC 0.16%Prologis, Inc. 0.17%
Carnival Corp Ltd 0.14%Chubb Ltd. 0.17%
Honeywell International Inc 0.14%Altria Group, Inc. 0.16%

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.

AVUS and ITOT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
AVUS
Avantis U.S. Equity ETF
ITOT
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerAvantisiShares
What it isU.S. EquityCore S&P Total U.S. Stock Market
Total return, 1 year+21.6%+17.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+4.1 pts−0.3 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50084.4%88.3%
Holdings18752497

AVUS in plain words

AVUS is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Equity. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.6% 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 1875 positions, with the top ten at 29.7%.

ITOT in plain words

ITOT is an index equity fund tracking the Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 88% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2497 positions, with the top ten at 32.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, AVUS or ITOT?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, AVUS returned +21.6% and ITOT returned +17.2%, so AVUS returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, AVUS or ITOT?
AVUS charges 0.15% a year and ITOT charges 0.03%, so ITOT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do AVUS and ITOT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 84% of AVUS and 88% of ITOT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 72% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources