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

GRNY vs IWF: how they differ

GRNY and IWF hold 30% of their weight in the same names, and GRNY returned more over the year.

Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap ETF and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, GRNY and IWF hold 30% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions GRNY and IWF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingGRNYIWF
Alphabet Inc2.96%6.18%
Broadcom Inc2.94%5.21%
Advanced Micro Devices Inc4.17%2.80%
NVIDIA Corp2.46%13.85%
Apple Inc2.40%6.72%
Microsoft Corp2.38%4.11%
Meta Platforms Inc2.24%3.01%
Tesla Inc2.15%3.65%
Caterpillar Inc2.69%1.44%
KLA Corp2.75%1.17%
General Electric Co2.04%1.15%
GE Vernova Inc3.05%0.94%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in GRNYOnly in IWF
Strategy Inc 3.01%ALPHABET INC. 4.98%
Eaton Corp PLC 2.56%MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 3.86%
ONEOK Inc 2.49%ELI LILLY AND COMPANY 2.84%
Air Products and Chemicals Inc 2.48%APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. 1.70%
Chevron Corp 2.46%VISA INC. 1.68%
JPMorgan Chase & Co 2.33%LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION 1.61%
Deere & Co 2.30%MASTERCARD INCORPORATED 1.23%
Goldman Sachs Group Inc/The 2.27%SANDISK CORPORATION 0.98%

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.

GRNY and IWF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
GRNY
Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap ETF
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFundstratiShares
What it isFundstrat Granny Shots US Large CapRussell 1000 growth
Total return, 1 year+13.8%+7.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−3.7 pts−10.5 pts
Expense ratio0.75%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50097.0%93.6%
Holdings40368

GRNY in plain words

GRNY is an index equity fund tracking the Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +13.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.75% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 40 positions, with the top ten at 30.8%.

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, GRNY or IWF?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, GRNY returned +13.8% and IWF returned +7.0%, so GRNY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, GRNY or IWF?
GRNY charges 0.75% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do GRNY and IWF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of GRNY and 94% of IWF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 30% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources