Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWC vs VEA: how they differ
IWC and VEA are both equity index funds, and over the year IWC returned more, +31.3% against +24.5%.
iShares Micro-Cap ETF and Vanguard Developed Markets Index Fund.
| IWC iShares Micro-Cap ETF | VEA Vanguard Developed Markets Index Fund | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Vanguard |
| What it is | Russell Microcap | Developed markets ex US |
| Total return, 1 year | +31.3% | +24.5% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +13.8 pts | +7.0 pts |
| Expense ratio | not published | 0.03% |
| Holdings | not filed | 3870 |
IWC in plain words
IWC is an index equity fund tracking the Russell Microcap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +31.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. It sat 5.0% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
VEA in plain words
VEA is an index equity fund tracking the Developed markets ex US. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +24.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% 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 3870 positions, with the top ten at 13.2%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWC or VEA?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWC returned +31.3% and VEA returned +24.5%, so IWC returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
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, IWC against VEA, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IWC-VEA Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources