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

IGM vs IYW: how they differ

IGM and IYW hold 72% of their weight in the same names, and IYW returned more over the year.

iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF and iShares U.S. Technology ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IGM and IYW hold 72% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IGM and IYW both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIGMIYW
NVIDIA Corp.7.97%16.25%
Apple, Inc.7.92%13.65%
Alphabet, Inc.4.45%7.84%
Microsoft Corp.7.50%3.99%
Broadcom, Inc.7.61%3.78%
Alphabet, Inc.3.55%6.34%
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.4.13%3.50%
Micron Technology, Inc.5.47%2.98%
Meta Platforms, Inc.4.17%2.81%
Intel Corp.2.88%2.56%
Lam Research Corp.2.37%1.99%
Applied Materials, Inc.2.50%1.92%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IGMOnly in IYW
Cisco Systems, Inc. 2.02%VERTIV HOLDINGS CO 0.77%
Netflix, Inc. 1.31%DOORDASH, INC. 0.38%
Seagate Technology Holdings plc 0.94%FLEX LTD. 0.21%
Arista Networks, Inc. 0.77%LEIDOS HOLDINGS, INC. 0.12%
Shopify, Inc. 0.61%SS&C TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS, INC. 0.09%
Accenture plc 0.33%TOAST, INC. 0.08%
NXP Semiconductors NV 0.31%CACI INTERNATIONAL INC. 0.07%
Ciena Corp. 0.30%GLOBALFOUNDRIES INC. 0.05%

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.

IGM and IYW on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IGM
iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF
IYW
iShares U.S. Technology ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isExpanded Tech SectorU.S. Technology
Total return, 1 year+32.7%+34.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+15.2 pts+17.4 pts
Expense ratio0.37%0.37%
Already in the S&P 50092.0%95.5%
Holdings295139

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.

IYW in plain words

IYW is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +34.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 139 positions, with the top ten at 63.7%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IGM or IYW?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IGM returned +32.7% and IYW returned +34.9%, so IYW returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IGM or IYW?
IGM charges 0.37% a year and IYW charges 0.37%, so IGM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IGM and IYW overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 92% of IGM and 96% of IYW by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 72% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources