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

IWF vs VO: how they differ

IWF and VO hold 10% of their weight in the same names, and VO returned more over the year.

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWF and VO hold 10% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IWF and VO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIWFVO
WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION0.64%1.07%
VERTIV HOLDINGS CO0.38%1.23%
QUANTA SERVICES, INC.0.32%1.05%
HOWMET AEROSPACE INC.0.32%1.04%
FORTINET, INC.0.28%0.46%
DATADOG, INC.0.25%0.84%
SNOWFLAKE INC.0.25%0.41%
BLOOM ENERGY CORPORATION0.24%0.79%
CLOUDFLARE, INC.0.23%0.76%
TERADYNE, INC.0.23%0.73%
Astera Labs, Inc0.22%0.36%
HILTON WORLDWIDE HOLDINGS INC.0.22%0.36%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IWFOnly in VO
NVIDIA CORPORATION 13.85%Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 1.05%
APPLE INC. 6.72%CRH PLC 0.69%
ALPHABET INC. 6.18%General Motors Co 0.67%
BROADCOM INC. 5.21%SLB Ltd 0.67%
ALPHABET INC. 4.98%Warner Bros Discovery Inc 0.62%
MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.11%PACCAR Inc 0.61%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 3.86%Digital Realty Trust Inc 0.61%
TESLA, INC. 3.65%Allstate Corp/The 0.59%

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.

IWF and VO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanguard
What it isRussell 1000 growthMid-Cap
Total return, 1 year+7.0%+12.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−10.5 pts−5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50093.6%91.4%
Holdings368282

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.

VO in plain words

VO is an index equity fund tracking the Mid-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 282 positions, with the top ten at 9.6%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWF or VO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and VO returned +12.0%, so VO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWF or VO?
IWF charges 0.18% a year and VO charges 0.03%, so VO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWF and VO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 94% of IWF and 91% of VO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 10% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources