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

DFUS vs IWO: how they differ

DFUS and IWO hold 2% of their weight in the same names.

Dimensional U.S. Equity Market ETF and iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DFUS and IWO hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DFUS and IWO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDFUSIWO
UMB FINANCIAL CORPORATION0.01%0.05%
ARGAN, INC.0.01%0.66%
BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES, INC.0.01%0.68%
ESCO TECHNOLOGIES INC.0.01%0.56%
FIRSTCASH HOLDINGS, INC.0.01%0.54%
MOOG INC.0.01%0.73%
OLD NATIONAL BANCORP0.01%0.06%
COMMERCIAL METALS COMPANY0.01%0.07%
ENERSYS0.01%0.49%
FEDERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION0.01%0.47%
FLUOR CORPORATION.0.01%0.14%
InterDigital, Inc.0.01%0.45%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DFUSOnly in IWO
NVIDIA CORPORATION 6.97%JFrog Ltd. 0.60%
APPLE INC. 5.86%D-Wave Quantum, Inc. 0.53%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.52%Ryman Hospitality Properties, Inc. 0.48%
AMAZON.COM, INC. 3.84%Hims & Hers Health, Inc. 0.45%
ALPHABET INC. 3.31%Alkermes plc 0.42%
BROADCOM INC. 2.90%Core Scientific, Inc. 0.42%
ALPHABET INC. 2.74%Nuvalent, Inc. 0.40%
META PLATFORMS, INC. 2.01%Spyre Therapeutics, Inc. 0.40%

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 Apr 30, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.

DFUS and IWO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DFUS
Dimensional U.S. Equity Market ETF
IWO
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerDimensionaliShares
What it isU.S. Equity MarketRussell 2000 Growth
Total return, 1 year+17.5%+17.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 5000.0 pts−0.5 pts
Expense ratio0.09%0.24%
Already in the S&P 50090.2%0.0%
Holdings22311133

DFUS in plain words

DFUS is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Equity Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2231 positions, with the top ten at 35.2%.

IWO in plain words

IWO is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% 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 1133 positions, with the top ten at 6.1%. It sat 7.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DFUS or IWO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DFUS returned +17.5% and IWO returned +17.0%, so DFUS returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DFUS or IWO?
DFUS charges 0.09% a year and IWO charges 0.24%, so DFUS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DFUS and IWO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 90% of DFUS and 0% of IWO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 2% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources