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

IBB vs ONEQ: how they differ

IBB and ONEQ hold 3% of their weight in the same names, and IBB returned more over the year.

iShares Biotechnology ETF and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IBB and ONEQ hold 3% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IBB and ONEQ both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIBBONEQ
Amgen, Inc.7.84%0.40%
Gilead Sciences, Inc.6.85%0.36%
Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.8.09%0.25%
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.4.91%0.14%
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc.3.12%0.09%
Natera, Inc.2.89%0.07%
Revolution Medicines, Inc.2.78%0.07%
Biogen, Inc.2.47%0.06%
Illumina, Inc.2.07%0.05%
United Therapeutics Corp.1.74%0.05%
Argenx SE3.76%0.05%
Insmed, Inc.1.79%0.05%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IBBOnly in ONEQ
Roivant Sciences Ltd. 1.43%NVIDIA CORP 11.24%
Ascendis Pharma A/S 1.29%APPLE INC 10.04%
Charles River Laboratories International 0.84%MICROSOFT CORP 7.32%
Alkermes plc 0.67%AMAZON.COM INC 6.37%
CRISPR Therapeutics AG 0.38%ALPHABET INC 4.85%
Newamsterdam Pharma Co. NV 0.21%BROADCOM INC 4.64%
uniQure NV 0.20%ALPHABET INC 4.48%
Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 0.20%TESLA INC 3.58%

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.

IBB and ONEQ on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IBB
iShares Biotechnology ETF
ONEQ
Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesFidelity
What it isBiotechnologyNasdaq Composite
Total return, 1 year+41.5%+20.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+24.0 pts+3.1 pts
Expense ratio0.44%0.21%
Already in the S&P 50035.6%87.4%
Holdings2481022

IBB in plain words

IBB is an index equity fund tracking the Biotechnology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +41.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.44% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 36% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 248 positions, with the top ten at 44.8%. It sat 6.5% below its high of Aug 19, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

ONEQ in plain words

ONEQ is an index equity fund tracking the Nasdaq Composite. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +20.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.21% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1022 positions, with the top ten at 57.9%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IBB or ONEQ?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IBB returned +41.5% and ONEQ returned +20.6%, so IBB returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IBB or ONEQ?
IBB charges 0.44% a year and ONEQ charges 0.21%, so ONEQ is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IBB and ONEQ overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 36% of IBB and 87% of ONEQ by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 3% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources