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 VHT: how they differ

IWB and VHT hold 9% of their weight in the same names, and VHT returned more over the year.

iShares Russell 1000 ETF and Vanguard Health Care Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWB and VHT hold 9% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IWB and VHT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIWBVHT
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY1.38%14.07%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON0.88%8.48%
ABBVIE INC.0.64%6.10%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED0.54%5.46%
MERCK & CO., INC.0.46%4.67%
AMGEN INC.0.28%2.87%
THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INCORPORATED0.27%2.93%
ABBOTT LABORATORIES0.23%2.36%
GILEAD SCIENCES, INC.0.23%2.64%
INTUITIVE SURGICAL, INC.0.20%2.39%
PFIZER INC.0.20%2.36%
CVS HEALTH CORPORATION0.19%1.83%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IWBOnly in VHT
NVIDIA CORPORATION 6.73%Cytokinetics Inc 0.14%
APPLE INC. 6.03%BrightSpring Health Services Inc 0.14%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.00%Praxis Precision Medicines Inc 0.13%
AMAZON.COM, INC. 3.33%Masimo Corp 0.13%
ALPHABET INC. 3.00%HealthEquity Inc 0.12%
BROADCOM INC. 2.54%Krystal Biotech Inc 0.11%
ALPHABET INC. 2.42%Alkermes PLC 0.10%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 1.88%Lantheus Holdings Inc 0.10%

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.

IWB and VHT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IWB
iShares Russell 1000 ETF
VHT
Vanguard Health Care Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanguard
What it isRussell 1000Health Care
Total return, 1 year+16.7%+21.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.8 pts+4.1 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.09%
Already in the S&P 50091.9%85.6%
Holdings1024401

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%.

VHT in plain words

VHT is an index equity fund tracking the Health Care. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 86% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 401 positions, with the top ten at 52.0%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Aug 19, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWB or VHT?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWB returned +16.7% and VHT returned +21.6%, so VHT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWB or VHT?
IWB charges 0.15% a year and VHT charges 0.09%, so VHT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWB and VHT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 92% of IWB and 86% of VHT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 9% 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 VHT, 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 VHT, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IWB-VHT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources