Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IYW vs SPMO: how they differ
IYW and SPMO hold 42% of their weight in the same names, and IYW returned more over the year.
iShares U.S. Technology ETF and Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IYW and SPMO hold 42% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IYW | SPMO |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA CORPORATION | 16.25% | 8.46% |
| ALPHABET INC. | 7.84% | 4.81% |
| ALPHABET INC. | 6.34% | 3.81% |
| BROADCOM INC. | 3.78% | 7.58% |
| ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. | 3.50% | 4.14% |
| MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. | 2.98% | 10.72% |
| INTEL CORPORATION | 2.56% | 2.95% |
| LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION | 1.99% | 3.54% |
| APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. | 1.92% | 1.77% |
| KLA CORPORATION | 1.41% | 1.39% |
| PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC. | 1.86% | 1.39% |
| AMPHENOL CORPORATION | 1.10% | 1.30% |
| Only in IYW | Only in SPMO |
|---|---|
| APPLE INC. 13.65% | Johnson & Johnson 3.85% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION 3.99% | Exxon Mobil Corp. 2.78% |
| META PLATFORMS, INC. 2.81% | Caterpillar Inc. 2.60% |
| ORACLE CORPORATION 1.67% | Cisco Systems, Inc. 2.02% |
| TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED 1.57% | Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 1.88% |
| INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORAT 1.32% | General Electric Co. 1.63% |
| QUALCOMM INCORPORATED 1.18% | Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) 1.43% |
| SALESFORCE, INC. 0.99% | RTX Corp. 1.40% |
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 May 31, 2026.
| IYW iShares U.S. Technology ETF | SPMO Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Invesco |
| What it is | U.S. Technology | S&P 500 Momentum |
| Total return, 1 year | +34.9% | +24.5% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +17.4 pts | +7.0 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.37% | 0.13% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 95.5% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 139 | 99 |
IYW in plain words
IYW is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +34.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.37% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 139 positions, with the top ten at 63.7%.
SPMO in plain words
SPMO is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Momentum. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +24.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.13% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 99 positions, with the top ten at 52.6%. It sat 8.3% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IYW or SPMO?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IYW returned +34.9% and SPMO returned +24.5%, so IYW returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IYW or SPMO?
- IYW charges 0.37% a year and SPMO charges 0.13%, so SPMO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IYW and SPMO overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 96% of IYW and 100% of SPMO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 42% 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, IYW against SPMO, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IYW-SPMO Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources