Data as of .
ITA vs KWEB: which is really different?
ITA holds 79.5% of its weight in S&P 500 companies and KWEB 0.0%.
ETFIQ Off-Index Score: KWEB scores higher
How much of it is not the index it is sold as an alternative to?
A percentile among the 371 thematic ETFs with a holdings filing. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All thematic ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, ITA and KWEB hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in ITA | Only in KWEB |
|---|---|
| GE AEROSPACE 21.81% | TENCENT HOLDINGS LTD 10.25% |
| RTX 17.21% | ALIBABA GROUP HOLDING LTD 8.61% |
| BOEING 9.36% | PDD HOLDINGS INC 8.11% |
| GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 4.82% | MEITUAN-CLASS B 7.32% |
| LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP 4.69% | NETEASE INC 6.25% |
| NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP 4.44% | LENOVO GROUP LTD 5.56% |
| TRANSDIGM GROUP 4.31% | KE HOLDINGS INC-CL A 4.41% |
| HOWMET AEROSPACE 4.24% | JD.COM INC-CLASS A 3.94% |
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 Sep 10, 2026 and Sep 11, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITA | KWEB | ITA | KWEB | ITA | KWEB | |
| 3 months | −6.3% | −7.1% | −9.6 pts | −10.4 pts | −5.5 pts | −6.3 pts |
| 6 months | −4.4% | −18.4% | −20.4 pts | −34.5 pts | −25.1 pts | −39.1 pts |
| 1 year | +10.0% | −36.0% | −7.5 pts | −53.5 pts | −13.0 pts | −59.0 pts |
| 3 years | +103.7% | −1.9% | +25.8 pts | −79.8 pts | +8.6 pts | −97.0 pts |
| Since launch | +906.7% | +20.6% | +102.3 pts | −438.4 pts | −767.2 pts | −919.7 pts |
| ITA iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF Holds 51 stocks in defense, 80% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF Holds 45 stocks in internet and e-commerce, 0% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | iShares | KraneShares |
| Theme | Defense | Internet and e-commerce |
| In the S&P 500 | 79.5% | 0.0% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 97.9% | 100.0% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 3.0% | 8.1% |
| Holdings | 51 | 45 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 77.5% | 61.2% |
| Expense ratio | 0.37% | 0.69% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.38% | 0.69% |
| Total return, 1 year | +10.0% | −36.0% |
| vs the S&P 500 | −7.5 pts | −53.5 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | −13.0 pts | −59.0 pts |
| Below its high | −13.5% | −71.5% |
ITA in plain words
By weight, 80% of ITA's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 98%. The top ten holdings are 78% of the fund across 51 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 10, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +10.0% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 7.5 pts. It sits 13.5% below its all-time high of Aug 14, 2026.
KWEB in plain words
By weight, 0% of KWEB's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 61% of the fund across 45 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 11, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned −36.0% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 53.5 pts. It sits 71.5% below its all-time high of Feb 17, 2021.
Questions people ask
- Which is more different from the S&P 500, ITA or KWEB?
- ITA has 80% of its weight in S&P 500 names and KWEB has 0%, so KWEB differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, ITA or KWEB?
- ITA charges 0.37% a year and KWEB charges 0.69%, so ITA is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
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, ITA against KWEB, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/ita-vs-kweb Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.