Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
DFUS vs ITOT: how they differ
DFUS and ITOT hold 87% of their weight in the same names.
Dimensional U.S. Equity Market ETF and iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, DFUS and ITOT hold 87% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | DFUS | ITOT |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA CORPORATION | 6.97% | 6.64% |
| APPLE INC. | 5.86% | 5.82% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION | 4.52% | 3.80% |
| AMAZON.COM, INC. | 3.84% | 3.20% |
| ALPHABET INC. | 3.31% | 2.87% |
| BROADCOM INC. | 2.90% | 2.45% |
| ALPHABET INC. | 2.74% | 2.29% |
| META PLATFORMS, INC. | 2.01% | 1.70% |
| TESLA, INC. | 1.78% | 1.62% |
| BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. | 1.30% | 1.26% |
| JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 1.26% | 1.20% |
| ELI LILLY AND COMPANY | 1.13% | 1.30% |
| Only in DFUS | Only in ITOT |
|---|---|
| LINDE PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.35% | Linde plc 0.33% |
| EATON CORPORATION PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.25% | Seagate Technology Holdings plc 0.30% |
| SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PUBLIC LIMIT 0.23% | Eaton Corp. plc 0.23% |
| HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATION 0.21% | Welltower, Inc. 0.22% |
| Chubb Limited 0.18% | Prologis, Inc. 0.17% |
| TRANE TECHNOLOGIES PLC 0.16% | Chubb Ltd. 0.17% |
| MEDTRONIC PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.15% | Trane Technologies plc 0.15% |
| ACCENTURE PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.15% | Equinix, Inc. 0.14% |
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.
| DFUS Dimensional U.S. Equity Market ETF | ITOT iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Dimensional | iShares |
| What it is | U.S. Equity Market | Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.5% | +17.2% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | 0.0 pts | −0.3 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.09% | 0.03% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 90.2% | 88.3% |
| Holdings | 2231 | 2497 |
DFUS in plain words
DFUS is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Equity Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2231 positions, with the top ten at 35.2%.
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, DFUS or ITOT?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DFUS returned +17.5% and ITOT returned +17.2%, so DFUS returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, DFUS or ITOT?
- DFUS charges 0.09% a year and ITOT charges 0.03%, so ITOT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do DFUS and ITOT overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 90% of DFUS and 88% of ITOT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 87% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, DFUS against ITOT, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DFUS-ITOT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources