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

SCHG vs SPHQ: how they differ

SCHG and SPHQ hold 16% of their weight in the same names, and SPHQ returned more over the year.

Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF and Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, SCHG and SPHQ hold 16% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions SCHG and SPHQ both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingSCHGSPHQ
Apple Inc9.84%4.51%
Visa Inc1.92%4.69%
Costco Wholesale Corp1.48%4.82%
Mastercard Inc1.41%4.32%
General Electric Co1.19%4.16%
GE Vernova Inc0.91%3.15%
KLA Corp0.88%3.27%
AppLovin Corp0.58%1.56%
Progressive Corp/The0.39%1.41%
Parker-Hannifin Corp0.37%1.08%
Adobe Inc0.37%1.45%
Constellation Energy Corp0.31%0.99%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in SCHGOnly in SPHQ
NVIDIA Corp 11.02%Lam Research Corp. 4.10%
Microsoft Corp 7.18%Caterpillar Inc. 3.78%
Amazon.com Inc 5.68%Cisco Systems, Inc. 3.54%
Alphabet Inc 4.76%Procter & Gamble Co. (The) 3.46%
Broadcom Inc 4.55%Coca-Cola Co. (The) 3.34%
Tesla Inc 3.92%Merck & Co., Inc. 2.87%
Alphabet Inc 3.78%Applied Materials, Inc. 2.80%
Meta Platforms Inc 3.46%Gilead Sciences, Inc. 2.28%

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.

SCHG and SPHQ on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
SPHQ
Invesco S&P 500 Quality ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabInvesco
What it isU.S. Large-Cap GrowthS&P 500 Quality
Total return, 1 year+12.7%+17.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−4.8 pts−0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.04%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50095.4%99.9%
Holdings19399

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%.

SPHQ in plain words

SPHQ is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 99 positions, with the top ten at 40.7%. It sat 6.1% below its high of Jun 30, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, SCHG or SPHQ?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, SCHG returned +12.7% and SPHQ returned +17.4%, so SPHQ returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, SCHG or SPHQ?
SCHG charges 0.04% a year and SPHQ charges 0.15%, so SCHG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do SCHG and SPHQ overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of SCHG and 100% of SPHQ by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 16% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources