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

SPY vs USMV: how they differ

SPY and USMV hold 32% of their weight in the same names, and SPY returned more over the year.

SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust and iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, SPY and USMV hold 32% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions SPY and USMV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingSPYUSMV
NVIDIA Corp.7.52%1.64%
Microsoft Corp.4.30%1.56%
Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.1.42%1.42%
Johnson & Johnson0.95%1.44%
Visa, Inc.0.88%0.94%
Exxon Mobil Corp.0.88%1.60%
Apple, Inc.6.59%0.82%
Walmart, Inc.0.77%0.88%
Cisco Systems, Inc.0.72%1.81%
Eli Lilly & Co.1.47%0.66%
Mastercard, Inc.0.64%1.15%
AbbVie, Inc.0.69%0.63%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in SPYOnly in USMV
Alphabet, Inc. 3.25%Chubb Limited 1.50%
Tesla, Inc. 1.84%WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC. 1.28%
JPMorgan Chase & Co. 1.36%ACCENTURE PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.75%
Intel Corp. 1.02%LINDE PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.69%
Lam Research Corp. 0.84%TE CONNECTIVITY PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.59%
Caterpillar, Inc. 0.76%LIBERTY MEDIA CORP - FORMULA ONE GROUP 0.57%
KLA Corp. 0.61%SUN COMMUNITIES, INC. 0.54%
GE Aerospace 0.60%ARCH CAPITAL GROUP LTD. 0.50%

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.

SPY and USMV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
SPY
SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust
USMV
iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerState StreetiShares
What it isS&P 500, book from IVVMSCI USA Min Vol Factor
Total return, 1 year+17.5%+6.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 5000.0 pts−10.9 pts
Expense ratio0.09%0.15%
Already in the S&P 500100.0%94.8%
Holdings504170

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%.

USMV in plain words

USMV is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Min Vol Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +6.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 170 positions, with the top ten at 15.7%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, SPY or USMV?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, SPY returned +17.5% and USMV returned +6.6%, so SPY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, SPY or USMV?
SPY charges 0.09% a year and USMV charges 0.15%, so SPY is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do SPY and USMV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 100% of SPY and 95% of USMV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 32% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources