Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IGM vs IWF: how they differ
IGM and IWF hold 60% of their weight in the same names, and IGM returned more over the year.
iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IGM and IWF hold 60% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IGM | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corp. | 7.97% | 13.85% |
| Apple, Inc. | 7.92% | 6.72% |
| Broadcom, Inc. | 7.61% | 5.21% |
| Alphabet, Inc. | 4.45% | 6.18% |
| Microsoft Corp. | 7.50% | 4.11% |
| Micron Technology, Inc. | 5.47% | 3.86% |
| Alphabet, Inc. | 3.55% | 4.98% |
| Meta Platforms, Inc. | 4.17% | 3.01% |
| Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | 4.13% | 2.80% |
| Applied Materials, Inc. | 2.50% | 1.70% |
| Lam Research Corp. | 2.37% | 1.61% |
| KLA Corp. | 1.72% | 1.17% |
| Only in IGM | Only in IWF |
|---|---|
| Intel Corp. 2.88% | TESLA, INC. 3.65% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. 2.02% | ELI LILLY AND COMPANY 2.84% |
| International Business Machines Corp. 1.15% | VISA INC. 1.68% |
| Seagate Technology Holdings plc 0.94% | CATERPILLAR INC. 1.44% |
| QUALCOMM, Inc. 0.85% | MASTERCARD INCORPORATED 1.23% |
| Shopify, Inc. 0.61% | GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 1.15% |
| Salesforce, Inc. 0.56% | GE VERNOVA INC. 0.94% |
| Synopsys, Inc. 0.37% | THE HOME DEPOT, INC. 0.77% |
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.
| IGM iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF | IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | Expanded Tech Sector | Russell 1000 growth |
| Total return, 1 year | +32.7% | +7.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +15.2 pts | −10.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.37% | 0.18% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 92.0% | 93.6% |
| Holdings | 295 | 368 |
IGM in plain words
IGM is an index equity fund tracking the Expanded Tech Sector. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +32.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.37% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 295 positions, with the top ten at 55.7%. It sat 5.1% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
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, IGM or IWF?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IGM returned +32.7% and IWF returned +7.0%, so IGM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IGM or IWF?
- IGM charges 0.37% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IGM and IWF overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 92% of IGM and 94% of IWF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 60% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IGM against IWF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IGM-IWF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources