Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
MTUM vs XLF: how they differ
MTUM and XLF hold 10% of their weight in the same names, and MTUM returned more over the year.
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF and State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, MTUM and XLF hold 10% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | MTUM | XLF |
|---|---|---|
| JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 2.87% | 11.57% |
| THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. | 1.69% | 3.94% |
| MORGAN STANLEY | 1.32% | 3.31% |
| WELLS FARGO & COMPANY | 1.26% | 3.34% |
| CITIGROUP INC. | 1.13% | 3.15% |
| The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation | 0.89% | 1.31% |
| ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC. | 0.57% | 1.05% |
| NASDAQ, INC. | 0.26% | 0.47% |
| INTERACTIVE BROKERS GROUP, INC. | 0.09% | 0.51% |
| CBOE GLOBAL MARKETS, INC. | 0.06% | 0.34% |
| THE HARTFORD INSURANCE GROUP, INC. | 0.05% | 0.48% |
| W. R. BERKLEY CORPORATION | 0.04% | 0.27% |
| Only in MTUM | Only in XLF |
|---|---|
| MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 5.57% | Berkshire Hathaway Inc 12.10% |
| BROADCOM INC. 5.41% | Visa Inc 7.51% |
| NVIDIA CORPORATION 4.65% | Mastercard Inc 5.47% |
| ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 4.04% | Bank of America Corp 4.91% |
| INTEL CORPORATION 3.84% | American Express Co 2.38% |
| JOHNSON & JOHNSON 3.76% | Charles Schwab Corp/The 1.99% |
| LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION 3.62% | Blackrock Inc 1.83% |
| EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 3.44% | Progressive Corp/The 1.68% |
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 Jun 30, 2026.
| MTUM iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF | XLF State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | State Street |
| What it is | MSCI USA Momentum Factor | Financials |
| Total return, 1 year | +21.8% | +7.6% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +4.3 pts | −9.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.15% | 0.08% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 98.2% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 125 | 76 |
MTUM in plain words
MTUM is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 98% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 125 positions, with the top ten at 40.5%. It sat 11.1% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
XLF in plain words
XLF is an index equity fund tracking the Financials. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% 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 76 positions, with the top ten at 57.7%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, MTUM or XLF?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, MTUM returned +21.8% and XLF returned +7.6%, so MTUM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, MTUM or XLF?
- MTUM charges 0.15% a year and XLF charges 0.08%, so XLF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do MTUM and XLF overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 98% of MTUM and 100% of XLF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 10% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, MTUM against XLF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/MTUM-XLF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources