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 SCHX: how they differ

IBB and SCHX hold 1% of their weight in the same names, and IBB returned more over the year.

iShares Biotechnology ETF and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IBB and SCHX hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IBB and SCHX both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIBBSCHX
Amgen, Inc.7.84%0.27%
Gilead Sciences, Inc.6.85%0.24%
Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.8.09%0.17%
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.4.91%0.09%
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc.3.12%0.06%
Natera, Inc.2.89%0.04%
Biogen, Inc.2.47%0.04%
Illumina, Inc.2.07%0.04%
United Therapeutics Corp.1.74%0.04%
Insmed, Inc.1.79%0.03%
Incyte Corp.1.75%0.02%
Moderna, Inc.1.99%0.02%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IBBOnly in SCHX
Argenx SE 3.76%NVIDIA Corp 7.51%
Revolution Medicines, Inc. 2.78%Apple Inc 6.71%
BeOne Medicines Ltd. 1.77%Microsoft Corp 4.89%
Roivant Sciences Ltd. 1.43%Amazon.com Inc 3.87%
Ascendis Pharma A/S 1.29%Alphabet Inc 3.24%
Genmab A/S 1.12%Broadcom Inc 3.10%
Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 1.00%Alphabet Inc 2.58%
Bridgebio Pharma, Inc. 0.98%Meta Platforms Inc 2.02%

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 SCHX on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IBB
iShares Biotechnology ETF
SCHX
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesSchwab
What it isBiotechnologyU.S. Large-Cap
Total return, 1 year+41.5%+16.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+24.0 pts−0.7 pts
Expense ratio0.44%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50035.6%94.9%
Holdings248748

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.

SCHX in plain words

SCHX is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Large-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.8% 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, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 748 positions, with the top ten at 37.3%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IBB or SCHX?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IBB returned +41.5% and SCHX returned +16.8%, so IBB returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IBB or SCHX?
IBB charges 0.44% a year and SCHX charges 0.03%, so SCHX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IBB and SCHX overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 36% of IBB and 95% of SCHX by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% 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 SCHX, 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 SCHX, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IBB-SCHX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources