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

ITOT vs SCHG: how they differ

ITOT and SCHG hold 48% of their weight in the same names, and ITOT returned more over the year.

iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ITOT and SCHG hold 48% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ITOT and SCHG both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingITOTSCHG
NVIDIA Corp.6.64%11.02%
Apple, Inc.5.82%9.84%
Microsoft Corp.3.80%7.18%
Amazon.com, Inc.3.20%5.68%
Alphabet, Inc.2.87%4.76%
Broadcom, Inc.2.45%4.55%
Alphabet, Inc.2.29%3.78%
Meta Platforms, Inc.1.70%3.46%
Tesla, Inc.1.62%3.92%
Eli Lilly & Co.1.30%3.06%
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.1.30%2.94%
Visa, Inc.0.78%1.92%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ITOTOnly in SCHG
Micron Technology, Inc. 1.78%Linde PLC 0.81%
Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. 1.26%Trane Technologies PLC 0.35%
JPMorgan Chase & Co. 1.20%TE Connectivity PLC 0.22%
Intel Corp. 0.90%Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd 0.13%
Johnson & Johnson 0.84%Carnival Corp Ltd 0.13%
Applied Materials, Inc. 0.79%FTAI Aviation Ltd 0.09%
Exxon Mobil Corp. 0.78%Flutter Entertainment PLC 0.06%
Lam Research Corp. 0.74%Roivant Sciences Ltd 0.05%

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.

ITOT and SCHG on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ITOT
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesSchwab
What it isCore S&P Total U.S. Stock MarketU.S. Large-Cap Growth
Total return, 1 year+17.2%+12.7%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.3 pts−4.8 pts
Expense ratio0.03%0.04%
Already in the S&P 50088.3%95.4%
Holdings2497193

ITOT in plain words

ITOT is an index equity fund tracking the Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% 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 Jun 30, 2026, 88% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2497 positions, with the top ten at 32.2%.

SCHG in plain words

SCHG is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Large-Cap Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.7% 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 May 31, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 193 positions, with the top ten at 57.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ITOT or SCHG?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ITOT returned +17.2% and SCHG returned +12.7%, so ITOT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ITOT or SCHG?
ITOT charges 0.03% a year and SCHG charges 0.04%, so ITOT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ITOT and SCHG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 88% of ITOT and 95% of SCHG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 48% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources