Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWF vs SCHX: how they differ
IWF and SCHX hold 56% of their weight in the same names, and SCHX returned more over the year.
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWF and SCHX hold 56% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IWF | SCHX |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA CORPORATION | 13.85% | 7.51% |
| APPLE INC. | 6.72% | 6.71% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION | 4.11% | 4.89% |
| ALPHABET INC. | 6.18% | 3.24% |
| BROADCOM INC. | 5.21% | 3.10% |
| ALPHABET INC. | 4.98% | 2.58% |
| META PLATFORMS, INC. | 3.01% | 2.02% |
| TESLA, INC. | 3.65% | 1.79% |
| MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. | 3.86% | 1.60% |
| ELI LILLY AND COMPANY | 2.84% | 1.28% |
| ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. | 2.80% | 1.23% |
| VISA INC. | 1.68% | 0.80% |
| Only in IWF | Only in SCHX |
|---|---|
| SANDISK CORPORATION 0.98% | Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.27% |
| TRANE TECHNOLOGIES PUBLIC LIMITED COMPAN 0.32% | JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.18% |
| SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES CORP. 0.24% | Exxon Mobil Corp 0.89% |
| SPOTIFY TECHNOLOGY S.A. 0.21% | Johnson & Johnson 0.80% |
| LUMENTUM HOLDINGS INC. 0.18% | Intel Corp 0.79% |
| Nu Holdings Ltd. 0.14% | Cisco Systems Inc 0.70% |
| ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES LTD. 0.13% | UnitedHealth Group Inc 0.51% |
| Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd 0.13% | Chevron Corp 0.50% |
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.
| IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | SCHX Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Schwab |
| What it is | Russell 1000 growth | U.S. Large-Cap |
| Total return, 1 year | +7.0% | +16.8% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −10.5 pts | −0.7 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.03% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 93.6% | 94.9% |
| Holdings | 368 | 748 |
IWF in plain words
IWF is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.0% 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, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 368 positions, with the top ten at 54.4%. It sat 5.0% below its high of Jun 1, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
SCHX in plain words
SCHX is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Large-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 748 positions, with the top ten at 37.3%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWF or SCHX?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and SCHX returned +16.8%, so SCHX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IWF or SCHX?
- IWF charges 0.18% a year and SCHX charges 0.03%, so SCHX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IWF and SCHX overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 94% of IWF and 95% of SCHX by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 56% 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, IWF against SCHX, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IWF-SCHX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources