257 essays 1,087 funds measured independent · not paid by any fund or issuer we cover

Overlap · from SEC filings

SMH vs VUG: what actually overlaps

SMH and VUG: 26.75% of a dollar ends up in the same companies either way (SEC Form N-PORT, 2026-06-30), across 14 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.

26.75%Overlap by weight
14Shared holdings
22.1Combined effective holdings
+2.3 vs VUG alone

The short version

Held alone, SMH behaves like 13.9 equally weighted positions and VUG like 19.8. Held together in equal size they behave like 22.1 — 2.3 more than VUG on its own, even at 26.75% overlap.

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 (2026-06-30 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
SMHVUG
Assets$77B$380B
Holdings25148
Effective holdings13.919.8
Top ten weight70.27%60.41%
Largest position17.56%12.62%
Priced at market (Level 1)100%100%
Reporting date2026-06-302026-06-30

Each fund on its own: SMH · VUG

Where the overlap actually is

14

The ten shared positions that account for the most of it, with what each fund holds of its own. Shared is the lesser of the two — the part that is held in common either way. Where the two columns diverge, one fund is making a larger bet on that company than the other, and holding both does not average it away.

CompanySMHVUGShared
NVIDIA Corp 17.558% 12.623% 12.623%
Broadcom Inc 5.283% 4.281% 4.281%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc 5.632% 2.616% 2.616%
Applied Materials Inc 5.743% 1.594% 1.594%
Lam Research Corp 5.316% 1.505% 1.505%
KLA Corp 5.577% 1.102% 1.102%
Intel Corp 5.15% 0.789% 0.789%
Marvell Technology Inc 4.667% 0.751% 0.751%
Texas Instruments Inc 4.172% 0.389% 0.389%
Cadence Design Systems Inc 2.152% 0.301% 0.301%

What the difference is made of

32.97% · 73.25%

32.97% of SMH sits in companies VUG does not hold at all, and 73.25% of VUG in companies SMH does not hold. The largest of each, by weight in its own fund:

Only in SMH (32.97%)
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd
  • Micron Technology Inc
  • ASML Holding NV
  • Analog Devices Inc
  • QUALCOMM Inc
Only in VUG (73.25%)
  • Apple Inc
  • Microsoft Corp
  • Alphabet Inc
  • Alphabet Inc
  • Amazon.com Inc

By country of issuer

2026-06-30

Where 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.

CountrySMHVUGDifference
United States 82.09% 100.00% −17.91
Taiwan 9.29% 0.00% +9.29
Netherlands° 7.45% 0.00% +7.45
United Kingdom 1.17% 0.00% +1.17

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.

FundPeriodPositionsAddedDroppedTurnoverLargest increase
SMH 2026-03-31 → 2026-06-30 25 → 25 009.9% Marvell Technology Inc 2.36% → 4.67%
VUG 2026-03-31 → 2026-06-30 154 → 148 71310.1% Advanced Micro Devices Inc 1.11% → 2.62%

Related comparisons

8

Other pairs involving SMH or VUG, ordered by how much they overlap.

PairOverlapCombined effective
SCHG vs VUG 78.1% 21.7
SMH vs SOXX 73.96% 18
SMH vs SOXQ 64.92% 17.5
QQQM vs VUG 62.67% 26.4
QQQ vs VUG 59.22% 27.7
VOO vs VUG 57.49% 31
IVV vs VUG 56.89% 31
VGT vs VUG 55.65% 18.5

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.