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

IWO vs VYM: how they differ

IWO and VYM hold 1% of their weight in the same names, and VYM returned more over the year.

iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF and Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWO and VYM hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IWO and VYM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIWOVYM
UMB Financial Corp.0.05%0.04%
FirstCash Holdings, Inc.0.54%0.04%
Old National Bancorp0.06%0.04%
Archrock, Inc.0.43%0.03%
GATX Corp.0.03%0.03%
Installed Building Products, Inc.0.33%0.03%
Valley National Bancorp0.11%0.03%
Glacier Bancorp, Inc.0.09%0.03%
Piper Sandler Cos.0.31%0.03%
Magnolia Oil & Gas Corp.0.29%0.02%
Liberty Energy, Inc.0.23%0.02%
SM Energy Co.0.02%0.03%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IWOOnly in VYM
Moog, Inc. 0.73%Broadcom Inc 8.07%
BrightSpring Health Services, Inc. 0.68%JPMorgan Chase & Co 3.36%
MaxLinear, Inc. 0.67%Exxon Mobil Corp 2.73%
Argan, Inc. 0.66%Johnson & Johnson 2.31%
JFrog Ltd. 0.60%Caterpillar Inc 1.73%
Krystal Biotech, Inc. 0.58%AbbVie Inc 1.57%
ESCO Technologies, Inc. 0.56%Cisco Systems Inc 1.52%
D-Wave Quantum, Inc. 0.53%Chevron Corp 1.51%

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.

IWO and VYM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IWO
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
VYM
Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanguard
What it isRussell 2000 GrowthUS high dividend
Total return, 1 year+17.0%+17.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.5 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.24%0.04%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%92.2%
Holdings1133608

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.

VYM in plain words

VYM is an index equity fund tracking the US high dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 608 positions, with the top ten at 25.7%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWO or VYM?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWO returned +17.0% and VYM returned +17.6%, so VYM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWO or VYM?
IWO charges 0.24% a year and VYM charges 0.04%, so VYM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWO and VYM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IWO and 92% of VYM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources