Home ETF Overlap EFA vs EFG

ETF Overlap Tool: EFA vs EFG

Compare portfolio holdings overlap, tech concentration risk, and expense ratio differences between iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) and iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG).

Start tracking portfolio

Connect your brokerage and see your actual compounding, dividends, and full ETF overlap — automatically.
Popular Comparisons: QQQ VS QQQM VOO VS SPY VV VS SPY VOO VS QQQ VYMI VS SCHY QQQM VS FTEC VUG VS MGK DGRW VS SCHD QQQ VS SMH VBR VS AVUV
ETF Overlap Overview & Key Metrics
EFA (780 Total) EFG (420 Total) ONLY IN EFA 21 Stocks (53.6% Weight) MODERATE HOLDINGS OVERLAP 29 Shared Stocks (83.2%) 22.4% Weight Duplication ONLY IN EFG 21 Stocks (53.6% Weight)
Overlap by Weight
22.4%
⚡ Moderate International Growth Overlap
Expense Ratio Gap
0.33% vs 0.36%
EFA is 1.1x cheaper than EFG
Unique Holdings
419 vs 21 Stocks
~0.0% Weight Difference
Sector Allocation Breakdown
Financials
25.84%
Industrials
19.24%
Information Technology
11.86%
Healthcare
9.98%
Consumer Discretionary
7.35%
Consumer Staples
6.42%
Materials
5.78%
Communication Services
4.72%
Energy
3.66%
Utilities
3.53%
Real Estate
1.62%
Industrials
28.5%
Information Technology
20.63%
Healthcare
12.64%
Financials
11.6%
Consumer Discretionary
9.17%
Materials
5.65%
Communication Services
5.44%
Consumer Staples
3.75%
Utilities
1.45%
Real Estate
0.66%
Energy
0.53%

Want to check your entire portfolio for hidden ETF overlap & model future allocation?

Connect your brokerage account to automatically analyze compounding and overlap, or use Portfolio Lab to model and backtest custom ETF allocations with real historical data.

Stock Holdings Breakdown (EFA vs EFG)

71 Assets
Asset Sector EFA Weight EFG Weight Combined (50/50) Status
Show entries
Showing 1 to 20 of 73 holdings

EFA vs EFG: Portfolio Overlap & Investment Strategy Guide

When evaluating iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) versus iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG), investors are comparing two distinct ETF strategies. EFA holds 780 total assets while EFG contains 420 total assets. Across both portfolios, they share 29 common stock holdings, representing a 22.4% portfolio overlap by weight.

Sector Concentration & Shared Stock Holdings

While both funds invest in equity markets, their internal sector allocations create meaningful differences in portfolio performance and volatility:

  • Primary Sector Focus: EFA concentrates its largest allocation in Financials (25.84%), whereas EFG allocates its highest weighting to Industrials (28.5%).
  • Top Shared Holdings: Key overlapping stocks held in both funds include ASML Holding N.V (ASML), AstraZeneca PLC (AZN), SAP SE (SAP), Commonwealth Bank Of Australia (CBA).
  • Holdings Distribution: EFA features 780 holdings compared to 420 holdings in EFG, affecting single-stock concentration risk.

Strategic Portfolio Insight: Low Overlap & Strong Complementary Diversification

Holding both EFA and EFG offers low portfolio duplication with only a 22.4% weight overlap. With 29 shared stocks, these two funds focus on different market segments, making them highly complementary for investors seeking targeted multi-asset diversification.

Expense Ratio Comparison & Performance: EFA vs EFG

Beyond portfolio holdings overlap, fund management fees, dividend yields, and sector diversification play a vital role in long-term compounding returns:

1. Annual Management Fee Impact

EFA charges a lower expense ratio of 0.33% compared to EFG at 0.36%. EFA is 1.1x cheaper, saving long-term investors approximately $3 per year for every $100,000 invested.

2. Volatility, Risk & Long-Term Growth Potential

EFA and EFG react differently to changing interest rates, market cycles, and sector rotations. Diversifying across funds with different underlying indexes helps reduce portfolio drawdown risk during broader market corrections.

Snowball Portfolio Lab Insight

Want to analyze how combining EFA and EFG impacts your total portfolio yield, sector distribution, and historical dividend income? Model your custom asset allocation in the Snowball Analytics Portfolio Lab.

Frequently Asked Questions: EFA vs EFG ETF Overlap
What is the portfolio overlap percentage between EFA and EFG?
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) and iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) have a 22.4% overlap by weight and share 29 identical stock holdings. EFA holds 780 total assets while EFG holds 420 total assets.
What is the main difference between EFA and EFG?
The main difference between EFA and EFG lies in sector allocation, expense ratio, and portfolio breadth:
  • Sector Focus: EFA's largest sector is Financials (25.84%), whereas EFG's largest sector is Industrials (28.5%).
  • Expense Ratio: EFA has an expense ratio of 0.33%, while EFG charges 0.36%. EFA is 1.1x cheaper than EFG.
  • Portfolio Breadth: EFA holds 780 total stocks vs EFG's 420 stocks.
Is it good to hold both EFA and EFG in the same portfolio?
Holding both EFA and EFG results in a 22.4% portfolio weight overlap across 29 common holdings. Holding both EFA and EFG offers strong complementary diversification with low weight overlap (22.4%), allowing investors to combine distinct market segments in a single portfolio.
Which ETF has lower management expense fees: EFA or EFG?
EFA has an expense ratio of 0.33%, while EFG charges 0.36%. EFA is 1.1x cheaper than EFG.
Which ETF is better for long-term investors: EFA or EFG?
The ideal choice depends on your investment strategy: EFA (0.33% expense ratio) provides exposure to iShares MSCI EAFE ETF, while EFG (0.36% expense ratio) offers exposure to iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF. Comparing sector concentration and historical volatility helps align your choice with long-term goals.
Do EFA and EFG pay dividends?
Yes, both EFA and EFG pay quarterly dividend distributions to shareholders derived from underlying dividend payments of portfolio companies.