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

FNDX vs XLC: how they differ

FNDX and XLC hold 9% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and State Street(R) Communication Services Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and XLC hold 9% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FNDX and XLC both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFNDXXLC
Alphabet Inc2.38%13.10%
Alphabet Inc1.90%10.44%
Meta Platforms Inc1.24%19.93%
Verizon Communications Inc0.99%4.15%
AT&T Inc0.81%4.10%
Comcast Corp0.57%4.71%
Walt Disney Co/The0.35%4.49%
Warner Bros Discovery Inc0.32%4.67%
Netflix Inc0.24%4.84%
T-Mobile US Inc0.17%4.16%
Charter Communications Inc0.15%1.44%
Omnicom Group Inc0.09%2.51%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FNDXOnly in XLC
Apple Inc 4.64%Live Nation Entertainment Inc 3.50%
Intel Corp 2.57%EchoStar Corp 1.67%
Microsoft Corp 2.33%TKO Group Holdings Inc 1.53%
Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29%Trade Desk Inc/The 0.93%
Amazon.com Inc 1.86%Fox Corp 0.79%
Micron Technology Inc 1.60%News Corp 0.41%
Chevron Corp 1.49%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.41%

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.

FNDX and XLC on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
XLC
State Street(R) Communication Services Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabState Street
What it isFundamental U.S. Large CompanyCommunication services
Total return, 1 year+26.1%−2.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+8.6 pts−19.5 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50091.2%100.0%
Holdings73323

FNDX in plain words

FNDX is an index equity fund tracking the Fundamental U.S. Large Company. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +26.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 733 positions, with the top ten at 22.5%.

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, FNDX or XLC?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and XLC returned −2.0%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FNDX or XLC?
FNDX charges 0.25% a year and XLC charges 0.08%, so XLC is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FNDX and XLC overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 100% of XLC by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 9% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources