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

GLD vs IWC: how they differ

GLD is a commodity fund and IWC an equity index fund, and over the year IWC returned more, +31.3% against +19.1%.

SPDR Gold Shares and iShares Micro-Cap ETF.

GLD and IWC on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
GLD
SPDR Gold Shares
IWC
iShares Micro-Cap ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerState StreetiShares
What it isGoldRussell Microcap
Total return, 1 year+19.1%+31.3%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.6 pts+13.8 pts
Expense ratio0.40%not published

GLD in plain words

GLD is a commodity fund tracking the Gold. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.40% a year. It sat 19.6% below its high of Jan 29, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IWC in plain words

IWC is an index equity fund tracking the Russell Microcap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +31.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. It sat 5.0% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, GLD or IWC?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, GLD returned +19.1% and IWC returned +31.3%, so IWC returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources