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 ONEQ: how they differ

IJT and ONEQ hold 1% of their weight in the same names, and ONEQ returned more over the year.

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IJT and ONEQ hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IJT and ONEQ both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJTONEQ
Viasat, Inc.1.35%0.03%
BrightSpring Health Services, Inc.1.22%0.03%
Powell Industries, Inc.0.90%0.02%
StoneX Group, Inc.0.93%0.02%
MYR Group, Inc.0.86%0.02%
Krystal Biotech, Inc.1.08%0.02%
Plexus Corp.0.39%0.02%
Qorvo, Inc.0.52%0.02%
FormFactor, Inc.1.38%0.02%
Mercury Systems, Inc.0.72%0.02%
Corcept Therapeutics, Inc.0.92%0.02%
Iridium Communications, Inc.0.39%0.02%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJTOnly in ONEQ
Argan, Inc. 1.24%NVIDIA CORP 11.24%
ESCO Technologies, Inc. 1.00%APPLE INC 10.04%
Alkermes plc 0.97%MICROSOFT CORP 7.32%
Everus Construction Group, Inc. 0.94%AMAZON.COM INC 6.37%
Ryman Hospitality Properties, Inc. 0.90%ALPHABET INC 4.85%
Enpro, Inc. 0.88%BROADCOM INC 4.64%
Federal Signal Corp. 0.87%ALPHABET INC 4.48%
JBT Marel Corp. 0.84%TESLA INC 3.58%

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 and May 31, 2026.

IJT and ONEQ on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJT
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF
ONEQ
Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesFidelity
What it isS&P Small-Cap 600 GrowthNasdaq Composite
Total return, 1 year+17.6%+20.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+0.1 pts+3.1 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.21%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%87.4%
Holdings3471022

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.

ONEQ in plain words

ONEQ is an index equity fund tracking the Nasdaq Composite. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +20.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.21% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1022 positions, with the top ten at 57.9%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IJT or ONEQ?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJT returned +17.6% and ONEQ returned +20.6%, so ONEQ returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJT or ONEQ?
IJT charges 0.18% a year and ONEQ charges 0.21%, so IJT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJT and ONEQ overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJT and 87% of ONEQ by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% 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 ONEQ, 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 ONEQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IJT-ONEQ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources