Which returned more over the last year, BOND or IWF?

In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BOND returned −0.1% and IWF returned +7.0%, so IWF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, BOND or IWF?

BOND charges 0.54% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

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

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

BOND vs IWF: how they differ

BOND and IWF hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and IWF returned more over the year.

PIMCO Active Bond Exchange-Traded Fund and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, BOND and IWF hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in BOND	Only in IWF
UMBS, TBA 4.80%	NVIDIA CORPORATION 13.85%
PIMCO Mortgage-Backed Securities Active 3.52%	APPLE INC. 6.72%
UMBS, TBA 2.98%	ALPHABET INC. 6.18%
United States Treasury 2.93%	BROADCOM INC. 5.21%
UMBS, TBA 2.36%	ALPHABET INC. 4.98%
United States Treasury 2.22%	MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.11%
UMBS, TBA 2.19%	MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 3.86%
UMBS, TBA 1.96%	TESLA, INC. 3.65%

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.

BOND and IWF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	BOND PIMCO Active Bond Exchange-Traded Fund	IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	PIMCO	iShares
What it is	Active Bond Exchange-Traded	Russell 1000 growth
Total return, 1 year	−0.1%	+7.0%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−17.6 pts	−10.5 pts
Expense ratio	0.54%	0.18%
Holdings	1565	368

BOND in plain words

BOND is a bond fund tracking the Active Bond Exchange-Traded. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −0.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.54% a year. It sat 3.3% below its high of Feb 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IWF in plain words

IWF is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.0% 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, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 368 positions, with the top ten at 54.4%. It sat 5.0% below its high of Jun 1, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, BOND or IWF?: In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BOND returned −0.1% and IWF returned +7.0%, so IWF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, BOND or IWF?: BOND charges 0.54% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

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.

BOND against IWF, 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, BOND against IWF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/BOND-IWF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources