Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IJT vs IWF: how they differ
IJT and IWF 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 Growth ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IJT and IWF hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IJT | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| FormFactor, Inc. | 1.38% | 0.04% |
| Powell Industries, Inc. | 0.90% | 0.03% |
| Corcept Therapeutics, Inc. | 0.92% | 0.02% |
| Everus Construction Group, Inc. | 0.94% | 0.02% |
| Etsy, Inc. | 0.79% | 0.01% |
| Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. | 0.80% | 0.01% |
| Armstrong World Industries, Inc. | 0.76% | 0.01% |
| Iridium Communications, Inc. | 0.39% | 0.01% |
| Lazard, Inc. | 0.04% | 0.00% |
| Lyft, Inc. | 0.61% | 0.00% |
| Credit Acceptance Corp. | 0.19% | 0.00% |
| Primoris Services Corp. | 0.60% | 0.00% |
| Only in IJT | Only in IWF |
|---|---|
| Viasat, Inc. 1.35% | NVIDIA CORPORATION 13.85% |
| Argan, Inc. 1.24% | APPLE INC. 6.72% |
| BrightSpring Health Services, Inc. 1.22% | ALPHABET INC. 6.18% |
| Krystal Biotech, Inc. 1.08% | BROADCOM INC. 5.21% |
| ESCO Technologies, Inc. 1.00% | ALPHABET INC. 4.98% |
| Alkermes plc 0.97% | MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.11% |
| StoneX Group, Inc. 0.93% | MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 3.86% |
| Ryman Hospitality Properties, Inc. 0.90% | TESLA, INC. 3.65% |
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 iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF | IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth | Russell 1000 growth |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.6% | +7.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +0.1 pts | −10.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.18% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 0.0% | 93.6% |
| Holdings | 347 | 368 |
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.
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. 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, IJT or IWF?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJT returned +17.6% and IWF returned +7.0%, so IJT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IJT or IWF?
- IJT charges 0.18% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so IJT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IJT and IWF overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJT and 94% of IWF 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IJT against IWF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IJT-IWF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources