ETF comparison

Side-by-side comparison for any two funds in the catalog — holdings overlap (weighted by ISIN/CUSIP), expense difference, and sub-score deltas. Pick a pair below, or jump to one of the matchups people most often compare.

Compare any two funds

8,763 pre-built pair pages are in the catalog. Pick any two funds and we'll jump straight to the matchup.

Popular comparisons

The matchups Bogleheads ask about most

Near-substitutes & tax-loss-harvesting partners

Same category, ≥80% holdings overlap. Pairs where one fund largely duplicates the other — useful for tax-loss harvesting (sell one, buy the other, keep economic exposure) or for picking the cheaper option among effectively identical funds.

Pair Overlap
EEM vs IEMG 86.8%
HYG vs HYLB 83.8%
FLIN vs INDA 87.0%
HYG vs USHY 85.2%
EWJ vs FLJP 83.0%
GPIQ vs QQQI 97.9%
GPIX vs SPYI 92.4%
GPIQ vs QYLD 94.5%
GPIX vs XYLD 90.2%
IYR vs SCHH 87.3%
BBJP vs EWJ 93.0%
IYE vs XLE 88.9%
IDU vs XLU 86.7%
IYG vs XLF 83.6%
FUTY vs IDU 90.8%
FENY vs IYE 90.2%
FREL vs IYR 86.6%
IDU vs VPU 90.2%
IYE vs VDE 88.5%
BBAX vs EPP 90.2%

Biggest in-category cost gaps

Same category, partial overlap (30–80%), meaningfully different expense ratios. The funds aren't perfect substitutes, but the cost gap is large enough to matter when choosing between them.

Pair Overlap
AAXJ vs SCHE 65.0%
AAXJ vs VWO 60.2%
EEM vs SCHE 78.1%
EEM vs VWO 70.7%
AAXJ vs SPEM 52.5%
EEM vs SPEM 64.4%
EPI vs FLIN 66.7%
AAXJ vs IEMG 69.5%
FVD vs VYM 32.1%
FBCG vs VUG 62.2%
FBCG vs IUSG 59.3%
FBCG vs SCHG 56.0%

Looking for substitutes for a specific fund? Open its catalog page — each fund links to its closest-overlap matches and to same-category alternates ranked by composite score.

Overlap is the sum of min(weight_a, weight_b) across positions matched on ISIN (CUSIP fallback). Methodology lives at /methodology/.