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

SCHH vs SPY: how they differ

SCHH and SPY hold 2% of their weight in the same names, and SPY returned more over the year.

Schwab U.S. REIT ETF and SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, SCHH and SPY hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions SCHH and SPY both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingSCHHSPY
Welltower Inc9.64%0.25%
Prologis Inc8.97%0.20%
Equinix Inc4.89%0.16%
American Tower Corp4.35%0.12%
Simon Property Group Inc4.48%0.11%
Digital Realty Trust Inc4.36%0.09%
Realty Income Corp4.00%0.09%
Public Storage3.41%0.08%
Ventas Inc2.85%0.07%
Iron Mountain Inc2.69%0.06%
Crown Castle Inc2.83%0.05%
Extra Space Storage Inc2.18%0.05%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in SCHHOnly in SPY
WP Carey Inc 1.16%NVIDIA Corp. 7.52%
Sun Communities Inc 1.02%Apple, Inc. 6.59%
Omega Healthcare Investors Inc 0.98%Microsoft Corp. 4.30%
Gaming and Leisure Properties Inc 0.94%Amazon.com, Inc. 3.62%
Lamar Advertising Co 0.94%Alphabet, Inc. 3.25%
Equity LifeStyle Properties Inc 0.85%Broadcom, Inc. 2.77%
EastGroup Properties Inc 0.76%Alphabet, Inc. 2.59%
American Homes 4 Rent 0.74%Micron Technology, Inc. 2.02%

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.

SCHH and SPY on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
SCHH
Schwab U.S. REIT ETF
SPY
SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabState Street
What it isUS REITS&P 500, book from IVV
Total return, 1 year+9.8%+17.5%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−7.7 pts0.0 pts
Expense ratio0.07%0.09%
Already in the S&P 50074.0%100.0%
Holdings117504

SCHH in plain words

SCHH is an index equity fund tracking the US REIT. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 74% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 117 positions, with the top ten at 49.8%. It sat 6.7% below its high of Jul 24, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

SPY in plain words

SPY is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% 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 504 positions, with the top ten at 36.4%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, SCHH or SPY?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, SCHH returned +9.8% and SPY returned +17.5%, so SPY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, SCHH or SPY?
SCHH charges 0.07% a year and SPY charges 0.09%, so SCHH is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do SCHH and SPY overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 74% of SCHH and 100% of SPY by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 2% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources