Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWD vs USMV: how they differ
IWD and USMV hold 32% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF and iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWD and USMV hold 32% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IWD | USMV |
|---|---|---|
| EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION | 1.60% | 1.60% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION | 3.89% | 1.56% |
| JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 1.72% | 1.44% |
| BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. | 2.62% | 1.42% |
| CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. | 1.30% | 1.81% |
| THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY | 0.96% | 1.11% |
| MERCK & CO., INC. | 0.89% | 1.18% |
| WALMART INC. | 1.28% | 0.88% |
| APPLE INC. | 5.38% | 0.82% |
| THE COCA-COLA COMPANY | 0.79% | 1.20% |
| INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORAT | 0.74% | 1.11% |
| LINDE PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY | 0.67% | 0.69% |
| Only in IWD | Only in USMV |
|---|---|
| JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. 2.46% | NVIDIA CORPORATION 1.64% |
| INTEL CORPORATION 1.72% | AMPHENOL CORPORATION 1.51% |
| BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION 0.99% | CENCORA, INC. 1.28% |
| THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. 0.82% | WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC. 1.28% |
| WELLS FARGO & COMPANY 0.71% | MASTERCARD INCORPORATED 1.15% |
| MORGAN STANLEY 0.66% | VISA INC. 0.94% |
| CITIGROUP INC. 0.57% | LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION 0.79% |
| THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INCORPORATED 0.52% | TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED 0.78% |
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 | USMV iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | Russell 1000 value | MSCI USA Min Vol Factor |
| Total return, 1 year | +27.4% | +6.6% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +9.9 pts | −10.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.15% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 90.2% | 94.8% |
| Holdings | 870 | 170 |
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%.
USMV in plain words
USMV is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Min Vol Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +6.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 170 positions, with the top ten at 15.7%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWD or USMV?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWD returned +27.4% and USMV returned +6.6%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IWD or USMV?
- IWD charges 0.18% a year and USMV charges 0.15%, so USMV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IWD and USMV overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 90% of IWD and 95% of USMV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 32% 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 USMV, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IWD-USMV Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources