Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) share 11 holdings, with roughly 21% of their portfolio weight overlapping.
Both funds' holdings are as of November 5, 2026.
Fund pages: SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) · SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF)
Weight overlap
21%
Shared portfolio weight
Shared holdings
11
Securities in both funds
Funds
SCHG · SMH
Compared side by side
Interactive charts, sector exposure, combined allocation, and the full overlap heatmap.
Every holding both funds own, ranked by shared exposure (how much of the position they hold in common). The weight gap shows which fund tilts more heavily into it.
| Holding | In SCHG | In SMH | Weight gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA | 11.03% | 21.00% | 9.97%SMH |
| AVGOBROADCOM | 3.81% | 5.88% | 2.07%SMH |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY | 2.16% | 4.13% | 1.97%SMH |
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES | 1.92% | 5.02% | 3.10%SMH |
| AMATAPPLIED MATERIALS | 0.74% | 3.95% | 3.21%SMH |
| KLACKLA | 0.49% | 4.12% | 3.63%SMH |
| CDNSCADENCE DESIGN SYS | 0.25% | 2.46% | 2.21%SMH |
| SNPSSYNOPSYS | 0.25% | 2.45% | 2.20%SMH |
| MPWRMONOLITHIC POWER SYSTEMS | 0.16% | 1.36% | 1.20%SMH |
| TERTERADYNE | 0.10% | 0.91% | 0.81%SMH |
| ALABAstera Labs | 0.08% | 0.77% | 0.69%SMH |
How each fund's equity holdings break down by sector, side by side — the clearest read on where the two funds tilt differently.
| Sector | In SCHG | In SMH |
|---|---|---|
Technology | 51.4% | 100.0% |
Communication Services | 12.7% | 0.0% |
Consumer Cyclical | 11.6% | 0.0% |
Healthcare | 7.9% | 0.0% |
Industrials | 6.5% | 0.0% |
Financial Services | 6.0% | 0.0% |
Consumer Defensive | 1.4% | 0.0% |
Basic Materials | 1.1% | 0.0% |
Energy | 0.7% | 0.0% |
Utilities | 0.4% | 0.0% |
Real Estate | 0.3% | 0.0% |
Weights are of each fund’s classified equity holdings.
SCHG
SMH
Two ETFs overlap when they hold the same underlying securities. Holding both funds can leave you more concentrated than you think — you may own the same large companies twice, at a combined weight neither fund shows on its own. The weight overlap above is the share of portfolio weight the two funds hold in common: for every security both own, it counts only the smaller of the two weights (the slice you genuinely double up on). 0% means completely different books; 100% means effectively identical funds.