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

IDEV vs SCHF: how they differ

IDEV and SCHF hold 22% of their weight in the same names, and SCHF returned more over the year.

iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF and Schwab International Equity ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IDEV and SCHF hold 22% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IDEV and SCHF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIDEVSCHF
Novartis AG0.97%0.98%
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA0.87%0.91%
THE TORONTO-DOMINION BANK0.63%0.65%
SAP SE0.61%0.63%
Allianz SE0.60%0.57%
ABB Ltd0.55%0.56%
SHOPIFY INC.0.52%0.49%
UBS Group AG0.49%0.50%
Siemens Energy AG0.57%0.48%
Airbus SE0.42%0.41%
Enbridge Inc.0.42%0.40%
Deutsche Telekom AG0.41%0.39%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IDEVOnly in SCHF
ASML Holding N.V. 1.95%SK hynix Inc 2.83%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.09%ASML Holding NV 2.12%
ASTRAZENECA PLC 1.02%HSBC Holdings PLC 1.09%
SHELL PLC 0.90%AstraZeneca PLC 0.94%
Nestle S.A. 0.90%Nestle SA 0.88%
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 0.78%Shell PLC 0.81%
COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA 0.73%Siemens AG 0.78%
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. 0.71%BHP Group Ltd 0.74%

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 May 31, 2026.

IDEV and SCHF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IDEV
iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF
SCHF
Schwab International Equity ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesSchwab
What it isCore MSCI International Developed MarketsInternational Equity
Total return, 1 year+18.7%+25.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.2 pts+8.0 pts
Expense ratio0.04%0.03%
Already in the S&P 5000.1%0.0%
Holdings22681476

IDEV in plain words

IDEV is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI International Developed Markets. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2268 positions, with the top ten at 10.2%.

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, IDEV or SCHF?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IDEV returned +18.7% and SCHF returned +25.4%, so SCHF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IDEV or SCHF?
IDEV charges 0.04% a year and SCHF charges 0.03%, so SCHF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IDEV and SCHF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IDEV and 0% of SCHF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 22% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources