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

IDEV vs IEMG: how they differ

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

iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IDEV and IEMG hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IDEV and IEMG both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIDEVIEMG
CANADIAN DOLLAR0.01%0.00%
HONG KONG DOLLAR0.00%0.01%
EURO0.21%0.00%
GREAT BRITISH POUND0.00%0.00%
SINGAPORE DOLLARS0.00%0.00%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IDEVOnly in IEMG
ASML Holding N.V. 1.95%Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa 12.52%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.09%SK hynix Inc. 5.83%
ASTRAZENECA PLC 1.02%Tencent Holdings Limited 2.38%
Novartis AG 0.97%Alibaba Group Holding Limited 1.83%
SHELL PLC 0.90%MediaTek Inc. 1.42%
Nestle S.A. 0.90%DELTA ELECTRONICS, INC. 1.03%
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 0.87%HON HAI PRECISION INDUSTRY CO., LTD. 0.79%
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 0.78%Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. 0.74%

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 May 31, 2026.

IDEV and IEMG on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IDEV
iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isCore MSCI International Developed MarketsCore MSCI Emerging Markets
Total return, 1 year+18.7%+30.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.2 pts+13.1 pts
Expense ratio0.04%0.09%
Already in the S&P 5000.1%0.0%
Holdings22682695

IDEV in plain words

IDEV is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI International Developed Markets. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2268 positions, with the top ten at 10.2%.

IEMG in plain words

IEMG is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI Emerging Markets. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +30.6% 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 May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2695 positions, with the top ten at 34.1%. It sat 4.0% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IDEV or IEMG?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IDEV returned +18.7% and IEMG returned +30.6%, so IEMG returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IDEV or IEMG?
IDEV charges 0.04% a year and IEMG charges 0.09%, so IDEV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IDEV and IEMG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IDEV and 0% of IEMG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 0% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources