Compare two portfolios to see how much they overlap. Understand your true diversification by analyzing combined holdings, sectors, and countries.
Popular comparisons:
Ensure each portfolio's weights sum to 100%
These portfolios share holdings ( of 's list, of 's) . Those shared names account for of each fund's weight on average — but at very different position sizes. See common holdings, sector, and country charts below for where conviction differs.
Biggest overlap by sector
Biggest sector differences
Shows what percentage of each ETF's holdings exist within other ETFs (regardless of weight).
/ holdings from exist in
% by weight
Top 20 holdings ranked by the gap between portfolio weights. Includes holdings present in only one portfolio (the other side shown as 0%).
| Company | Ticker | Sector | Country | Weight | Weight | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No matches for "".
Showing of matching
Shows what percentage of each ETF's holdings are found in other ETFs. A high containment percentage means most holdings from one ETF exist in the other (regardless of weight).
Containment % = share of holdings by count. Weight Contained = share of the source ETF's portfolio weight that overlaps. Often higher than Containment % when the largest holdings overlap.
| Source ETF | Target ETF | Common / Total | Containment % | Weight Contained | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| / |
Change = difference between portfolio weights. Positive (green) means the second portfolio has more; negative (red) means the first portfolio does.
No sectors with differences of 1% or more. Try 'All sectors'.
| Sector | Weight | Weight | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
Change = difference between portfolio weights. Positive (green) means the second portfolio has more; negative (red) means the first portfolio does.
No countries with differences of 1% or more. Try 'All countries'.
| Country / Region | Weight | Weight | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
Based on your holdings, here are simpler alternatives that closely match your current allocation:
Similarity Score
| ETF | Provider | Holdings as of | Holdings count |
|---|---|---|---|
Our in-depth Canadian investing course covers ETFs, TFSAs, RRSPs, and building a portfolio you can stick with.
ETF overlap is the share of holdings that two ETFs have in common. Two ETFs can look very different on paper — different tickers, different providers, different names — but hold many of the same underlying stocks or bonds. When that happens, owning both ETFs gives you less diversification than the count of tickers in your portfolio suggests.
Holding multiple ETFs does not automatically mean better diversification. If your "growth" ETF and your "U.S. equity" ETF both hold roughly the same FAANG stocks at similar weights, you're concentrated in the same handful of companies even though your account shows two different funds. Overlap analysis makes that concentration visible — so you can decide whether the second ETF is adding genuinely different exposure or just adding fees and tax-form complexity.
We pull each ETF's full holdings directly from the provider (iShares, Vanguard, BMO, CIBC, and others) and compare them at the security level. The headline Overlap figure is the sum-of-minimums between the two portfolios — for each shared holding, we take the lower of the two weights and add them up. This is the dollar-truthful measure: it tells you what fraction of each portfolio's money is exposed to identical positions. The tool also breaks out sector exposure and country / region exposure side-by-side, and reports how many holdings the two portfolios share by name. Where a portfolio contains an asset-allocation ETF (like XEQT), we look through to its underlying holdings so the comparison is apples-to-apples.
Two ETFs can share most of the same companies but invest in them at very different sizes — that's common when comparing a broad index fund against an active or factor-tilted fund. The Overlap % captures the real dollar duplication, while the supporting sentence above the charts surfaces how many names the portfolios share. Together they tell the full story.
Some pairings Canadian DIY investors compare most often:
ETF provider data is messy. Different providers report holdings using different naming conventions ("Apple" vs "APPLE INC"), use different sector taxonomies (Morningstar's "Consumer Cyclical" vs GICS's "Consumer Discretionary"), and update on different schedules. We normalize where we can, but tiny discrepancies are expected. Overlap is also a snapshot in time — fund composition changes over months and years. Use this tool as one input into your asset-allocation thinking, not as a definitive verdict on whether two funds are interchangeable.