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

EZU vs SCHF: how they differ

EZU and SCHF hold 6% of their weight in the same names, and SCHF returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI Eurozone ETF and Schwab International Equity ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, EZU and SCHF hold 6% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions EZU and SCHF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingEZUSCHF
SAP SE2.44%0.63%
Allianz SE2.18%0.57%
Siemens Energy AG1.89%0.48%
Airbus SE1.60%0.41%
Infineon Technologies AG1.60%0.41%
Deutsche Telekom AG1.59%0.39%
Nokia Oyj1.00%0.26%
AXA SA0.99%0.25%
Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellscha0.89%0.23%
Nordea Bank Abp0.76%0.21%
Deutsche Post AG0.71%0.18%
BASF SE0.68%0.18%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in EZUOnly in SCHF
ASML Holding N.V. 8.10%SK hynix Inc 2.83%
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 3.08%ASML Holding NV 2.12%
Banco Santander, S.A. 2.37%HSBC Holdings PLC 1.09%
TOTALENERGIES SE 2.25%Novartis AG 0.98%
SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC SE 2.22%AstraZeneca PLC 0.94%
Iberdrola, S.A. 1.89%Royal Bank of Canada 0.91%
LVMH MOET HENNESSY LOUIS VUITTON SE 1.76%Nestle SA 0.88%
Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A. 1.72%Shell PLC 0.81%

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 May 31, 2026.

EZU and SCHF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
EZU
iShares MSCI Eurozone ETF
SCHF
Schwab International Equity ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesSchwab
What it isMSCI EurozoneInternational Equity
Total return, 1 year+18.0%+25.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+0.5 pts+8.0 pts
Expense ratio0.50%0.03%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings2261476

EZU in plain words

EZU is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI Eurozone. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.50% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 226 positions, with the top ten at 28.2%. It sat 3.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

SCHF in plain words

SCHF is an index equity fund tracking the International Equity. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +25.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1476 positions, with the top ten at 14.9%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, EZU or SCHF?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, EZU returned +18.0% and SCHF returned +25.4%, so SCHF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, EZU or SCHF?
EZU charges 0.50% a year and SCHF charges 0.03%, so SCHF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do EZU and SCHF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of EZU and 0% of SCHF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 6% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources