Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWD vs MTUM: how they differ
IWD and MTUM hold 20% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWD and MTUM hold 20% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IWD | MTUM |
|---|---|---|
| JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 2.46% | 2.87% |
| INTEL CORPORATION | 1.72% | 3.84% |
| JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 1.72% | 3.76% |
| EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION | 1.60% | 3.44% |
| WALMART INC. | 1.28% | 2.76% |
| THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. | 0.82% | 1.69% |
| INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORAT | 0.74% | 1.20% |
| RTX CORPORATION | 0.72% | 1.46% |
| WELLS FARGO & COMPANY | 0.71% | 1.26% |
| MORGAN STANLEY | 0.66% | 1.32% |
| CITIGROUP INC. | 0.57% | 1.13% |
| ANALOG DEVICES, INC. | 0.51% | 1.02% |
| Only in IWD | Only in MTUM |
|---|---|
| AMAZON.COM, INC. 5.95% | MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 5.57% |
| APPLE INC. 5.38% | BROADCOM INC. 5.41% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION 3.89% | NVIDIA CORPORATION 4.65% |
| BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2.62% | ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 4.04% |
| CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. 1.30% | LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION 3.62% |
| ABBVIE INC. 1.15% | CATERPILLAR INC. 3.21% |
| UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED 1.05% | ALPHABET INC. 2.95% |
| BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION 0.99% | GE VERNOVA INC. 2.54% |
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 Apr 30, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.
| IWD iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF | MTUM iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | Russell 1000 value | MSCI USA Momentum Factor |
| Total return, 1 year | +27.4% | +21.8% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +9.9 pts | +4.3 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.15% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 90.2% | 98.2% |
| Holdings | 870 | 125 |
IWD in plain words
IWD is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +27.4% 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, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 870 positions, with the top ten at 27.9%.
MTUM in plain words
MTUM is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.8% 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 Apr 30, 2026, 98% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 125 positions, with the top ten at 40.5%. It sat 11.1% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWD or MTUM?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWD returned +27.4% and MTUM returned +21.8%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IWD or MTUM?
- IWD charges 0.18% a year and MTUM charges 0.15%, so MTUM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IWD and MTUM overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 90% of IWD and 98% of MTUM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 20% 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, IWD against MTUM, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IWD-MTUM Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources