Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
USMV vs XLI: how they differ
USMV and XLI hold 5% of their weight in the same names, and XLI returned more over the year.
iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF and State Street(R) Industrial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, USMV and XLI hold 5% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | USMV | XLI |
|---|---|---|
| WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC. | 1.48% | 1.43% |
| Northrop Grumman Corporation | 0.85% | 1.18% |
| LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION | 0.79% | 1.79% |
| REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC. | 1.26% | 0.74% |
| UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. | 0.29% | 2.55% |
| ROLLINS, INC. | 0.41% | 0.21% |
| GE VERNOVA INC. | 0.20% | 5.48% |
| VERISK ANALYTICS, INC. | 0.13% | 0.41% |
| RTX CORPORATION | 0.13% | 4.44% |
| GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION | 0.07% | 1.56% |
| AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING, INC. | 0.06% | 1.55% |
| Only in USMV | Only in XLI |
|---|---|
| CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. 1.81% | Caterpillar Inc 8.52% |
| NVIDIA CORPORATION 1.64% | General Electric Co 6.77% |
| EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 1.60% | Boeing Co/The 2.96% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION 1.56% | Eaton Corp PLC 2.87% |
| DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION 1.55% | Union Pacific Corp 2.81% |
| THE SOUTHERN COMPANY 1.53% | Deere & Co 2.77% |
| AMPHENOL CORPORATION 1.51% | Vertiv Holdings Co 2.23% |
| Chubb Limited 1.50% | Parker-Hannifin Corp 2.14% |
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.
| USMV iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | XLI State Street(R) Industrial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | State Street |
| What it is | MSCI USA Min Vol Factor | Industrials |
| Total return, 1 year | +6.6% | +14.3% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −10.9 pts | −3.3 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.15% | 0.08% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 94.8% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 170 | 81 |
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%.
XLI in plain words
XLI is an index equity fund tracking the Industrials. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +14.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% 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 81 positions, with the top ten at 41.4%. It sat 7.6% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, USMV or XLI?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, USMV returned +6.6% and XLI returned +14.3%, so XLI returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, USMV or XLI?
- USMV charges 0.15% a year and XLI charges 0.08%, so XLI is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do USMV and XLI overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 95% of USMV and 100% of XLI by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 5% 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, USMV against XLI, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/USMV-XLI Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources