Overlap · from SEC filings
SGOV vs XLK: what actually overlaps
SGOV and XLK: 0% of a dollar ends up in the same companies either way (SEC Form N-PORT, 2026-05-31 and 2026-06-30), across 0 securities the two funds both hold. Every free comparison tool can list the tickers in common; this weights them, which is the part that decides whether owning both changes anything.
The short version
Held alone, SGOV behaves like 17.2 equally weighted positions and XLK like 16.3. Held together in equal size they behave like 33.4 — 16.2 more than SGOV on its own. They share no securities at all, so the pair genuinely widens.
Overlap here is the sum, over securities both funds hold, of the smaller of the two weights: the share of a dollar that sits in the same company either way. Matching is on CUSIP. Figures are as of each fund's own reporting date (2026-05-31 and 2026-06-30), which do not always align.
Not 50/50, or holding a third fund alongside these two? The portfolio calculator runs this same math for any weights, across up to 12 funds.
Side by side
as filed| SGOV | XLK | |
|---|---|---|
| Assets | $100B | $124B |
| Holdings | 23 | 75 |
| Effective holdings | 17.2 | 16.3 |
| Top ten weight | 66.79% | 64.47% |
| Largest position | 9.36% | 14.65% |
| Priced at market (Level 1) | 0.86% | 100% |
| Reporting date | 2026-05-31 | 2026-06-30 |
What the difference is made of
100% · 100%100% of SGOV sits in companies XLK does not hold at all, and 100% of XLK in companies SGOV does not hold. The largest of each, by weight in its own fund:
- United States of America
- United States of America
- United States of America
- United States of America
- United States of America
- NVIDIA Corp
- Apple Inc
- Microsoft Corp
- Micron Technology Inc
- Broadcom Inc
By country of issuer
2026-05-31 · 2026-06-30Where each fund's money sits by the issuer country its filer reported (incorporation, not revenue). Two funds can share companies and still differ here, and a pair that looks diversified by name can be one country twice.
| Country | SGOV | XLK | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 100.00% | 97.31% | +2.69 |
| Ireland° | 0.00% | 1.96% | −1.96 |
| Netherlands° | 0.00% | 0.40% | −0.40 |
| Singapore | 0.00% | 0.33% | −0.33 |
What each fund did last quarter
Each fund's newest filing against its previous one. A pair whose overlap is rising or falling does so because of these moves; the figures are the same ones on each fund's page and in its feed.
Related comparisons
8Other pairs involving SGOV or XLK, ordered by how much they overlap.
| Pair | Overlap | Combined effective |
|---|---|---|
| VGT vs XLK | 78.84% | 15.9 |
| QQQ vs XLK | 56.76% | 24.8 |
| QQQM vs XLK | 55.5% | 24.2 |
| VUG vs XLK | 54.44% | 19.6 |
| SMH vs XLK | 50.64% | 18.1 |
| IVV vs XLK | 37.98% | 29 |
| VOO vs XLK | 37.22% | 29 |
| ITOT vs XLK | 33.53% | 31.5 |
Sources and limits
Computed from SEC Form N-PORT (NPORT-P), the portfolio report every registered US fund files. Positions below 0.001% of net assets are dropped; weights are normalised to each filing's own total.
Unit investment trusts including SPY and DIA do not file N-PORT, so no overlap can be computed for them. Where a comparison is missing from this site, that is usually why rather than an oversight.
Overlap says what is held in common, not what will move together. Two funds with no shared holdings can still fall together, and the effective holding count takes no account of correlation. All 275 pairs are in the concentration dataset, and every fund's own history is on its fund page.