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

GARP vs IWF: how they differ

GARP and IWF hold 54% of their weight in the same names, and GARP returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, GARP and IWF hold 54% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions GARP and IWF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingGARPIWF
APPLE INC4.44%6.72%
NVIDIA CORP4.16%13.85%
MICROSOFT CORP4.10%4.11%
BROADCOM INC3.96%5.21%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC6.07%3.86%
META PLATFORMS INC3.35%3.01%
ALPHABET INC2.88%6.18%
ELI LILLY & COMPANY3.73%2.84%
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC2.21%2.80%
VISA INC3.73%1.68%
LAM RESEARCH CORP3.79%1.61%
MASTERCARD INC1.63%1.23%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in GARPOnly in IWF
ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES LTD 1.46%TESLA, INC. 3.65%
MERCADOLIBRE INC 1.40%APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. 1.70%
FREEPORT-MCMORAN INC 0.59%CATERPILLAR INC. 1.44%
SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PLC 0.49%SANDISK CORPORATION 0.98%
COEUR MINING INC 0.31%TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED 0.80%
FLUTTER ENTERTAINMENT PLC 0.26%THE HOME DEPOT, INC. 0.77%
EQT CORP 0.25%WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION 0.64%
CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP INC 0.23%CORNING INCORPORATED 0.60%

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.

GARP and IWF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
GARP
iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI USA Quality GARPRussell 1000 growth
Total return, 1 year+29.5%+7.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+12.0 pts−10.5 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50094.4%93.6%
Holdings131368

GARP in plain words

GARP is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Quality GARP. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +29.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% 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 131 positions, with the top ten at 43.8%.

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, GARP or IWF?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, GARP returned +29.5% and IWF returned +7.0%, so GARP returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, GARP or IWF?
GARP charges 0.15% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so GARP is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do GARP and IWF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 94% of GARP and 94% of IWF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 54% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources