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

IJT vs IWB: how they differ

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

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF and iShares Russell 1000 ETF.

What they hold in common

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

Positions IJT and IWB both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJTIWB
FormFactor, Inc.1.38%0.02%
Element Solutions, Inc.0.61%0.02%
Corcept Therapeutics, Inc.0.92%0.01%
Everus Construction Group, Inc.0.94%0.01%
Powell Industries, Inc.0.90%0.01%
Ralliant Corp.0.47%0.01%
Qorvo, Inc.0.52%0.01%
Armstrong World Industries, Inc.0.76%0.01%
Etsy, Inc.0.79%0.01%
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.0.80%0.01%
Iridium Communications, Inc.0.39%0.01%
Lyft, Inc.0.61%0.01%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJTOnly in IWB
Viasat, Inc. 1.35%NVIDIA CORPORATION 6.73%
Argan, Inc. 1.24%APPLE INC. 6.03%
BrightSpring Health Services, Inc. 1.22%MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.00%
Krystal Biotech, Inc. 1.08%AMAZON.COM, INC. 3.33%
ESCO Technologies, Inc. 1.00%ALPHABET INC. 3.00%
Alkermes plc 0.97%BROADCOM INC. 2.54%
StoneX Group, Inc. 0.93%ALPHABET INC. 2.42%
Ryman Hospitality Properties, Inc. 0.90%MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 1.88%

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.

IJT and IWB on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJT
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF
IWB
iShares Russell 1000 ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isS&P Small-Cap 600 GrowthRussell 1000
Total return, 1 year+17.6%+16.7%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+0.1 pts−0.8 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.15%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%91.9%
Holdings3471024

IJT in plain words

IJT is an index equity fund tracking the S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% 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 347 positions, with the top ten at 11.0%. It sat 7.0% below its high of Aug 4, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IWB in plain words

IWB is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% 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 1024 positions, with the top ten at 33.5%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IJT or IWB?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJT returned +17.6% and IWB returned +16.7%, so IJT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJT or IWB?
IJT charges 0.18% a year and IWB charges 0.15%, so IWB is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJT and IWB overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJT and 92% of IWB 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources