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

IWB vs MDY: how they differ

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

iShares Russell 1000 ETF and SPDR S&P MidCap 400 ETF Trust.

What they hold in common

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

Positions IWB and MDY both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIWBMDY
TWILIO INC.0.04%0.86%
CARPENTER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION0.04%0.85%
MKS, INCORPORATED.0.04%0.83%
CURTISS-WRIGHT CORPORATION0.04%0.77%
ATI INC0.04%0.74%
ENTEGRIS, INC.0.04%0.76%
ILLUMINA, INC.0.04%0.73%
MACOM TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS HOLDINGS, INC0.04%0.69%
MASTEC, INC.0.04%0.71%
WOODWARD, INC.0.04%0.70%
Everpure, Inc0.04%0.69%
STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE, INC.0.04%0.71%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IWBOnly in MDY
NVIDIA CORPORATION 6.73%NVENT ELECTRIC PLC 0.76%
APPLE INC. 6.03%TECHNIPFMC PLC 0.73%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.00%FABRINET 0.56%
AMAZON.COM, INC. 3.33%ROIVANT SCIENCES LTD 0.44%
ALPHABET INC. 3.00%JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS PLC 0.42%
BROADCOM INC. 2.54%RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS LTD 0.37%
ALPHABET INC. 2.42%MOOG INC 0.33%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 1.88%CYTOKINETICS INC 0.32%

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.

IWB and MDY on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IWB
iShares Russell 1000 ETF
MDY
SPDR S&P MidCap 400 ETF Trust
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesState Street
What it isRussell 1000S&P MidCap 400, book from IJH
Total return, 1 year+16.7%+13.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.8 pts−4.5 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.23%
Already in the S&P 50091.9%0.0%
Holdings1024400

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%.

MDY in plain words

MDY is an index equity fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +13.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.23% 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 5.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWB or MDY?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWB returned +16.7% and MDY returned +13.0%, so IWB returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWB or MDY?
IWB charges 0.15% a year and MDY charges 0.23%, so IWB is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWB and MDY overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 92% of IWB and 0% of MDY 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources