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

IWD vs SCHH: how they differ

IWD and SCHH hold 3% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.

iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF and Schwab U.S. REIT ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWD and SCHH hold 3% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IWD and SCHH both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIWDSCHH
WELLTOWER INC.0.45%9.64%
PROLOGIS, INC.0.35%8.97%
EQUINIX, INC.0.29%4.89%
DIGITAL REALTY TRUST, INC.0.18%4.36%
REALTY INCOME CORPORATION0.16%4.00%
PUBLIC STORAGE.0.12%3.41%
VENTAS, INC.0.12%2.85%
IRON MOUNTAIN INCORPORATED0.10%2.69%
CROWN CASTLE INC.0.09%2.83%
EXTRA SPACE STORAGE INC.0.09%2.18%
VICI PROPERTIES INC.0.08%2.19%
AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION0.07%4.35%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IWDOnly in SCHH
AMAZON.COM, INC. 5.95%Simon Property Group Inc 4.48%
APPLE INC. 5.38%CareTrust REIT Inc 0.65%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 3.89%Ryman Hospitality Properties Inc 0.52%
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2.62%Terreno Realty Corp 0.49%
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. 2.46%Essential Properties Realty Trust Inc 0.46%
INTEL CORPORATION 1.72%Macerich Co/The 0.44%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON 1.72%Kite Realty Group Trust 0.42%
EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 1.60%Phillips Edison & Co Inc 0.36%

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.

IWD and SCHH on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IWD
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
SCHH
Schwab U.S. REIT ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesSchwab
What it isRussell 1000 valueUS REIT
Total return, 1 year+27.4%+9.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+9.9 pts−7.7 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.07%
Already in the S&P 50090.2%74.0%
Holdings870117

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%.

SCHH in plain words

SCHH is an index equity fund tracking the US REIT. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 74% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 117 positions, with the top ten at 49.8%. It sat 6.7% below its high of Jul 24, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWD or SCHH?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWD returned +27.4% and SCHH returned +9.8%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWD or SCHH?
IWD charges 0.18% a year and SCHH charges 0.07%, so SCHH is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWD and SCHH overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 90% of IWD and 74% of SCHH by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 3% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources