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 VBR: how they differ

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

Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF and Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund.

What they hold in common

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

Positions SCHG and VBR both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingSCHGVBR
EMCOR Group Inc0.13%0.40%
First Citizens BancShares Inc/NC0.07%0.33%
Moderna Inc0.06%0.54%
NVR Inc0.06%0.19%
Performance Food Group Co0.05%0.36%
Carlisle Cos Inc0.05%0.32%
Lululemon Athletica Inc0.05%0.13%
Rubrik Inc0.04%0.26%
CACI International Inc0.04%0.22%
American Airlines Group Inc0.03%0.26%
Builders FirstSource Inc0.03%0.20%
Pool Corp0.02%0.16%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in SCHGOnly in VBR
NVIDIA Corp 11.02%Jabil Inc 0.87%
Apple Inc 9.84%NRG Energy Inc 0.66%
Microsoft Corp 7.18%Tapestry Inc 0.64%
Amazon.com Inc 5.68%Atmos Energy Corp 0.62%
Alphabet Inc 4.76%Williams-Sonoma Inc 0.59%
Broadcom Inc 4.55%Smurfit Westrock PLC 0.52%
Tesla Inc 3.92%F5 Inc 0.50%
Alphabet Inc 3.78%US Foods Holding Corp 0.48%

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.

SCHG and VBR on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
VBR
Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabVanguard
What it isU.S. Large-Cap GrowthSmall-Cap Value
Total return, 1 year+12.7%+16.3%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−4.8 pts−1.2 pts
Expense ratio0.04%0.05%
Already in the S&P 50095.4%30.5%
Holdings193840

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%.

VBR in plain words

VBR is an index equity fund tracking the Small-Cap Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.05% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 30% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 840 positions, with the top ten at 5.9%. It sat 3.8% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, SCHG or VBR?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, SCHG returned +12.7% and VBR returned +16.3%, so VBR returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, SCHG or VBR?
SCHG charges 0.04% a year and VBR charges 0.05%, so SCHG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do SCHG and VBR overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of SCHG and 30% of VBR 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources