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

IJH vs IWO: how they differ

IJH and IWO hold 4% of their weight in the same names, and IWO returned more over the year.

iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF and iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IJH and IWO hold 4% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IJH and IWO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJHIWO
MOOG INC0.33%0.73%
ENERSYS0.24%0.49%
FIRSTCASH HOLDINGS INC0.23%0.54%
HEALTHEQUITY INC0.21%0.46%
HIMS & HERS HEALTH INC0.20%0.45%
INTERDIGITAL INC0.20%0.45%
LANTHEUS HOLDINGS INC0.20%0.43%
SILICON LABORATORIES INC0.20%0.44%
COMMVAULT SYSTEMS INC0.16%0.38%
NOVANTA INC0.16%0.35%
FLUOR CORP0.20%0.14%
QUALYS INC0.13%0.30%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJHOnly in IWO
TWILIO INC 0.86%BrightSpring Health Services, Inc. 0.68%
CARPENTER TECHNOLOGY CORP 0.85%MaxLinear, Inc. 0.67%
MKS INC 0.83%Argan, Inc. 0.66%
CURTISS-WRIGHT CORP 0.77%JFrog Ltd. 0.60%
ENTEGRIS INC 0.76%Krystal Biotech, Inc. 0.58%
NVENT ELECTRIC PLC 0.76%ESCO Technologies, Inc. 0.56%
ATI INC 0.74%D-Wave Quantum, Inc. 0.53%
ILLUMINA INC 0.73%StoneX Group, Inc. 0.52%

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.

IJH and IWO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJH
iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF
IWO
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isS&P MidCap 400Russell 2000 Growth
Total return, 1 year+13.4%+17.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−4.1 pts−0.5 pts
Expense ratio0.05%0.24%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings4001133

IJH in plain words

IJH is an index equity fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +13.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.05% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 400 positions, with the top ten at 7.7%. It sat 5.4% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IWO in plain words

IWO is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1133 positions, with the top ten at 6.1%. It sat 7.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IJH or IWO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJH returned +13.4% and IWO returned +17.0%, so IWO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJH or IWO?
IJH charges 0.05% a year and IWO charges 0.24%, so IJH is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJH and IWO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJH and 0% of IWO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 4% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources