Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWO vs VGT: how they differ
IWO and VGT hold 4% of their weight in the same names, and VGT returned more over the year.
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF and Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWO and VGT hold 4% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IWO | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| Hut 8 Corp. | 0.38% | 0.13% |
| Riot Platforms, Inc. | 0.39% | 0.12% |
| MaxLinear, Inc. | 0.67% | 0.11% |
| Core Scientific, Inc. | 0.42% | 0.10% |
| D-Wave Quantum, Inc. | 0.53% | 0.10% |
| Cipher Digital, Inc. | 0.50% | 0.09% |
| Plexus Corp. | 0.49% | 0.09% |
| Novanta, Inc. | 0.35% | 0.08% |
| Silicon Laboratories, Inc. | 0.44% | 0.08% |
| Rigetti Computing, Inc. | 0.37% | 0.08% |
| Kulicke & Soffa Industries, Inc. | 0.42% | 0.08% |
| Commvault Systems, Inc. | 0.38% | 0.07% |
| Only in IWO | Only in VGT |
|---|---|
| Moog, Inc. 0.73% | NVIDIA Corp 16.85% |
| BrightSpring Health Services, Inc. 0.68% | Apple Inc 14.59% |
| Argan, Inc. 0.66% | Microsoft Corp 9.47% |
| JFrog Ltd. 0.60% | Broadcom Inc 4.21% |
| Krystal Biotech, Inc. 0.58% | Micron Technology Inc 4.21% |
| ESCO Technologies, Inc. 0.56% | Advanced Micro Devices Inc 3.21% |
| FirstCash Holdings, Inc. 0.54% | Intel Corp 2.03% |
| StoneX Group, Inc. 0.52% | Cisco Systems Inc 1.85% |
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.
| IWO iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF | VGT Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Vanguard |
| What it is | Russell 2000 Growth | Information technology |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.0% | +35.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −0.5 pts | +17.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.24% | 0.09% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 0.0% | 86.9% |
| Holdings | 1133 | 317 |
IWO in plain words
IWO is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1133 positions, with the top ten at 6.1%. It sat 7.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
VGT in plain words
VGT is an index equity fund tracking the Information technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +35.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 317 positions, with the top ten at 59.5%. It sat 3.6% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWO or VGT?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWO returned +17.0% and VGT returned +35.4%, so VGT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IWO or VGT?
- IWO charges 0.24% a year and VGT charges 0.09%, so VGT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IWO and VGT overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IWO and 87% of VGT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 4% 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, IWO against VGT, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IWO-VGT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources