MTUM vs SPYG: Correlation & Overlap
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF (SPYG) show a very strong relationship: their 3-year correlation of weekly returns is 0.89. The two funds also share 27.9% of their portfolios by weight.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are MTUM and SPYG?
Over the past 3 years, MTUM and SPYG moved with a correlation of 0.89, which is very strong, meaning they move nearly in lockstep. The past 12 months show a weaker link (0.77) than the 3-year average (0.89). Over 5 years the correlation is 0.86, and the annualized covariance of weekly returns is 346.9 %².
Within MTUM's tracked universe of 109 assets, SPYG comes in at #5 by 3-year correlation. Neither side won the trailing year by much: +25.2% against +22.4%. The rolling one-year correlation moved between 0.63 and 0.95 over the past three years, a moderate range.
How is this computed?
Pearson correlation on weekly returns: ρ(A,B) = cov(rA, rB) / (σA · σB), over windows of 52, 156 and 260 weeks. Covariance is annualized (×52) and expressed in %². Full definitions on the methodology page.
MTUM vs SPYG: side by side
| MTUM (iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF) | SPYG (SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +25.2% | +22.4% |
| 5-year return | +76.1% | +85.9% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 20.6% | 18.9% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 1.25 | 1.25 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -21.0% | -22.1% |
| Dividend yield | 0.62% | 0.49% |
| Expense ratio | 0.15% | 0.04% |
| Assets under management | $25.3B | $52.2B |
| Sector / category | ETF · US Style | ETF · US Style |
On the fund side, MTUM sits in the Large Blend category at iShares, with $25.3B under management, 126 holdings, a 0.15% expense ratio, a 0.62% trailing dividend yield. SPYG is a Large Growth fund from State Street Investment Management: $52.2B under management, 148 holdings, a 0.04% expense ratio, a 0.49% trailing dividend yield.
Portfolio overlap between MTUM and SPYG
The two portfolios partially overlap: 27.9% of the funds' weight sits in the same underlying holdings (48 common positions). Correlation tells you they move together; overlap tells you why.
| Common holding | Weight in MTUM | Weight in SPYG |
|---|---|---|
| AVGO | 4.25% | 4.71% |
| MU | 6.60% | 2.96% |
| GOOGL | 2.44% | 5.61% |
| AMD | 5.09% | 2.19% |
| GOOG | 1.89% | 4.49% |
| LRCX | 3.26% | 1.10% |
| JNJ | 3.67% | 1.07% |
| AMAT | 2.89% | 1.07% |
| CAT | 3.63% | 1.06% |
| GEV | 2.91% | 0.72% |
| KLAC | 1.51% | 0.67% |
| CSCO | 2.43% | 0.66% |
| ANET | 0.80% | 0.58% |
| GS | 1.38% | 0.56% |
| APH | 0.82% | 0.56% |
Largest positions held only by MTUM: INTC (3.91%), XOM (3.78%), WMT (2.44%), WDC (1.89%), CVX (1.75%). Only by SPYG: NVDA (14.21%), MSFT (10.32%), AAPL (6.44%), AMZN (3.78%), META (3.54%).
Overlap = sum of the smaller of the two weights across common holdings, from issuer disclosures as of 2026-08-26. Top 15 common positions shown.
Year-by-year returns
| Year | MTUM | SPYG |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -18.3% | -29.4% |
| 2023 | +9.1% | +30.0% |
| 2024 | +32.9% | +36.0% |
| 2025 | +22.1% | +22.1% |
| 2026 | +21.8% | +14.5% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are MTUM and SPYG good diversifiers for each other?
Not really. At 0.89, the two trade almost as one position, and owning both buys little extra protection.
FAQ
What is the correlation between MTUM and SPYG?
As of 2026-08-27, the correlation of weekly returns between MTUM and SPYG is 0.89 over 3 years, 0.77 over 1 year and 0.86 over 5 years.
Is SPYG a good diversifier for MTUM?
Not really. At 0.89, the two trade almost as one position, and owning both buys little extra protection.
How much do MTUM and SPYG overlap?
27.9% by weight, across 48 common holdings, based on issuer-disclosed portfolios as of 2026-08-26.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/mtum-vs-spyg.json
Drop this badge in a README or notebook; it updates with the data:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/mtum-vs-spyg/)
Free with attribution; caching and terms are described in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: MTUM correlations · SPYG correlations
