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

In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BOND returned −0.1% and IWM returned +21.2%, so IWM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, BOND or IWM?

BOND charges 0.54% a year and IWM charges 0.19%, so IWM 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 IWM: how they differ

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

PIMCO Active Bond Exchange-Traded Fund and iShares Russell 2000 ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, BOND and IWM 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 IWM
UMBS, TBA 4.80%	Moog, Inc. 0.38%
PIMCO Mortgage-Backed Securities Active 3.52%	Hut 8 Corp. 0.37%
UMBS, TBA 2.98%	Viasat, Inc. 0.35%
United States Treasury 2.93%	BrightSpring Health Services, Inc. 0.35%
UMBS, TBA 2.36%	Cytokinetics, Inc. 0.35%
United States Treasury 2.22%	MaxLinear, Inc. 0.34%
UMBS, TBA 2.19%	Argan, Inc. 0.34%
UMBS, TBA 1.96%	UMB Financial Corp. 0.33%

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 IWM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	BOND PIMCO Active Bond Exchange-Traded Fund	IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	PIMCO	iShares
What it is	Active Bond Exchange-Traded	Russell 2000
Total return, 1 year	−0.1%	+21.2%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−17.6 pts	+3.7 pts
Expense ratio	0.54%	0.19%
Holdings	1565	2014

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.

IWM in plain words

IWM is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.19% 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 2014 positions, with the top ten at 3.4%. It sat 5.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, BOND or IWM?: In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BOND returned −0.1% and IWM returned +21.2%, so IWM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, BOND or IWM?: BOND charges 0.54% a year and IWM charges 0.19%, so IWM 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 IWM, 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 IWM, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/BOND-IWM Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources