What do you actually own when you own XEQT?
"Thousands of stocks" is true and slightly misleading. XEQT holds 8,301 equity positions, but the largest ten are 17.93% of the money, so roughly one dollar in six sits in ten companies. Enter your position below and see the actual dollars you hold in each company, sector and country. This is look-through data from the underlying funds, refreshed monthly.
Bars are scaled to the largest item in the view. Dollar figures are your position multiplied by each weight. Company weights cover the 25 largest holdings only, which together are 28.34% of the fund; the remaining 71.66% is spread across everything else.
Is XEQT too heavily weighted to the United States?
It is 43.69% United States by country of listing. The honest answer is that this is less American than the world is.
The US is roughly 60 to 65 percent of global market capitalisation. A pure market-weight global fund would therefore hold more America than XEQT does, not less. What makes XEQT feel US-heavy is not the American slice, it is that the top ten holdings are dominated by a handful of enormous American companies, so the names you recognise are all from one country.
If you are worried about American concentration, the thing to examine is not XEQT's US weight but whether you hold an S&P 500 or Nasdaq fund alongside it. That is what actually doubles your exposure to the same dozen companies. XEQT on its own is underweight the US relative to global market weights.
See also the longer discussion of US weighting.
The Canadian home bias, quantified
Canada is 24.86% of XEQT against roughly 3% of global market capitalisation, which is about 8.3 times the global weighting. This is the single largest deliberate deviation from market weights in the fund, and it is a choice BlackRock made on your behalf.
There are real arguments for it. Canadian eligible dividends are taxed far more favourably than foreign income in a non-registered account, there is no currency risk on the Canadian slice, and Canadians ultimately spend Canadian dollars. There is also a real cost: the Canadian market is heavily concentrated in financials and resources, so a Canadian overweight is a bet on banks and commodities whether you intended one or not. Financials alone are 20.06% of the whole fund.
Position count is a poor measure of diversification
8,301 positions sounds like total diversification. But the fund is capitalisation weighted, so the largest ten are 17.93% of the money and the largest twenty-five are 28.34%.
Put the other way round: everything outside the top twenty-five, which is thousands of companies, accounts for 71.66% of your money. The long tail is real but it barely moves the needle. This is not a flaw in XEQT, it is what market-cap weighting means, and it is true of every index fund. It is just worth knowing before you describe yourself as holding thousands of companies.
If you hold other funds alongside it
The most common portfolio mistake among XEQT holders is adding a US index fund for "more growth". Using the explorer above, here is why that does not do what people expect.
- VFV, ZSP, XUS or any S&P 500 fund holds the same companies as the 43.69% American slice of XEQT, and in nearly the same order. Adding one does not diversify, it concentrates.
- A Nasdaq fund overlaps almost entirely with the big tech group already at 13.93% of XEQT.
- A Canadian dividend fund overlaps the 20.06% already in financials, most of which is the same five banks.
- What genuinely adds something is an asset class XEQT does not hold at all: bonds, real assets, or a small-cap value tilt. See what to hold beyond XEQT.
The underlying funds
XEQT does not hold shares directly. It holds 6 other iShares funds, and those hold the shares. Everything above is computed by looking through them.
What this does not show
- Only the 25 largest companies. The company view covers 28.34% of the fund. BlackRock publishes the full holdings file if you want every line.
- Country of listing, not of revenue. A company listed in the US may earn most of its money elsewhere, so true economic exposure is more global than the country table suggests.
- A single month. Weights drift with prices. Big tech's share rises in a tech rally without anybody buying anything.
- No currency breakdown. XEQT is unhedged, so the non-Canadian 75.14% carries currency exposure, which cuts both ways.
Questions
XEQT is 43.69 percent United States by country of listing as of September 2026. That is less than the roughly 60 to 65 percent the US represents in global market capitalisation, so by that yardstick XEQT is actually underweight America, not overweight it. The reason is the deliberate Canadian home bias, which crowds out everything else.
Canada is 24.86 percent of XEQT, against roughly 3 percent of global market capitalisation. That is about 8.3 times the global weighting. It is intentional: Canadian dividends are taxed more favourably, there is no currency risk on the Canadian slice, and Canadians spend Canadian dollars. It also concentrates you in an economy dominated by banks and resources, which is the real cost.
The ten largest positions are 17.93 percent of the fund and the top twenty-five are 28.34 percent, spread across 8,301 equity positions in total. So roughly one dollar in six sits in ten companies, which is far more concentrated than "9,000 stocks" suggests.
The Magnificent Seven group comes to about 13.93 percent of XEQT. Information Technology as a whole is 22.87 percent. If you also hold an S&P 500 or Nasdaq fund alongside XEQT, you own those same companies twice and your real exposure is higher than either fund suggests on its own.
Yes, 8,301 equity positions on a look-through basis, held through 6 underlying iShares funds rather than directly. But a count of positions is a poor measure of diversification when the largest ten are 17.93 percent of the money. Capitalisation weighting means the tail of thousands of small holdings contributes very little.