IWF vs CNDX overlap

59% by weight, as of October 14, 2026: heavy overlap. 61 companies appear in both funds; they make up 74% of IWF and 82% of CNDX.

The largest shared positions are NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, META and GOOGL. Ranked by the smaller of the two weights, which is the part you would own twice.

Out of every $100 split evenly between them, about $59 (half in each fund) buys identical positions. The rest is exposure only one of the two funds gives you: 310 names only in IWF, 40 only in CNDX. Half in each behaves like 27 equally weighted stocks, against 20 for IWF alone and 31 for CNDX alone. Whether that duplication is a problem depends on the mix you want; this is a description, not advice.

Partly: 59% of the money in CNDX and IWF is the same, as of October 14, 2026. CNDX is iShares Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF (ISIN IE00B53SZB19), an Irish-domiciled UCITS fund on the Nasdaq-100 index. European brokers generally don't sell US-listed ETFs such as IWF to retail clients, because those funds publish no KID (the PRIIPs key information document); UCITS funds do.

Yes. CNDX also trades as CNX1 (London, GBP), SXRV (Xetra, EUR) and CSNDX (Borsa Italiana, EUR). Each is the same portfolio in another currency, on another exchange or paying its dividends out, so IWF vs SXRV also overlaps 59%.

For every company held by both funds we take the smaller of its two weights and add them up. The weights come from the full holdings files iShares publish, not a top-10 sample, and companies are matched by their ISIN so share classes stay apart. Sector overlap applies the same rule to the issuers' sector labels; "behaves like N equally weighted stocks" is one over the sum of the squared weights.