Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

AVUV vs IJT: how they differ

AVUV and IJT hold 17% of their weight in the same names, and AVUV returned more over the year.

Avantis U.S. Small Cap Value ETF and iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, AVUV and IJT hold 17% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions AVUV and IJT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingAVUVIJT
Viasat Inc1.39%1.35%
StoneX Group Inc0.77%0.93%
Archrock Inc0.61%0.79%
Kodiak Gas Services Inc0.56%0.81%
Axos Financial Inc0.56%0.61%
PriceSmart Inc0.60%0.55%
Urban Outfitters Inc0.55%0.40%
Catalyst Pharmaceuticals Inc0.48%0.40%
Cal-Maine Foods Inc0.56%0.40%
Iridium Communications Inc0.71%0.39%
Plexus Corp0.69%0.39%
Argan Inc0.36%1.24%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in AVUVOnly in IJT
Matson Inc 0.98%FormFactor, Inc. 1.38%
Lear Corp 0.90%BrightSpring Health Services, Inc. 1.22%
SM Energy Co 0.86%Krystal Biotech, Inc. 1.08%
Avnet Inc 0.86%ESCO Technologies, Inc. 1.00%
Macy's Inc 0.78%Alkermes plc 0.97%
Five Below Inc 0.72%Everus Construction Group, Inc. 0.94%
Cabot Corp 0.71%Corcept Therapeutics, Inc. 0.92%
Lantheus Holdings Inc 0.70%Powell Industries, Inc. 0.90%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

AVUV and IJT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
AVUV
Avantis U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
IJT
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerAvantisiShares
What it isU.S. Small Cap ValueS&P Small-Cap 600 Growth
Total return, 1 year+24.6%+17.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+7.2 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.18%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings795347

AVUV in plain words

AVUV is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Small Cap Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +24.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 795 positions, with the top ten at 8.7%.

IJT in plain words

IJT is an index equity fund tracking the S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 347 positions, with the top ten at 11.0%. It sat 7.0% below its high of Aug 4, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, AVUV or IJT?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, AVUV returned +24.6% and IJT returned +17.6%, so AVUV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, AVUV or IJT?
AVUV charges 0.25% a year and IJT charges 0.18%, so IJT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do AVUV and IJT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of AVUV and 0% of IJT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 17% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

AVUV against IJT, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, AVUV against IJT, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/AVUV-IJT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources