Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

IBB vs IJT: how they differ

IBB and IJT hold 3% of their weight in the same names, and IBB returned more over the year.

iShares Biotechnology ETF and iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IBB and IJT hold 3% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IBB and IJT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIBBIJT
PROTAGONIST THERAPEUTICS0.66%1.03%
ALKERMES0.56%0.91%
PTC THERAPEUTICS0.40%0.66%
ACADIA PHARMACEUTICALS0.35%0.41%
VERACYTE0.24%0.40%
ADMA BIOLOGICS0.16%0.26%
ARCUS BIOSCIENCES0.16%0.17%
SAREPTA THERAPEUTICS0.15%0.16%
VERICEL0.14%0.23%
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY0.12%0.76%
VIR BIOTECHNOLOGY0.10%0.06%
USD CASH0.05%0.02%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IBBOnly in IJT
VERTEX PHARMACEUTICALS 7.94%CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS 1.29%
AMGEN INC 7.85%VIASAT INC 1.19%
GILEAD SCIENCES 7.44%BRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC 1.09%
REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS 5.92%FORMFACTOR INC 1.03%
ARGENX SE ADR 3.78%RYMAN HOSPITALITY PROPERTIES REIT 0.98%
MODERNA 3.67%STONEX GROUP INC 0.87%
NATERA 3.30%TG THERAPEUTICS 0.86%
REVOLUTION MEDICINES 2.87%MADISON SQUARE GARDEN SPORTS CLASS 0.83%

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 Sep 10, 2026.

IBB and IJT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IBB
iShares Biotechnology ETF
IJT
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isBiotechnologyS&P Small-Cap 600 Growth
Total return, 1 year+41.5%+17.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+24.0 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.44%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50035.6%0.0%
Holdings233355

IBB in plain words

IBB is an index equity fund tracking the Biotechnology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +41.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.44% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 36% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 233 positions, with the top ten at 47.5%. It sat 6.5% below its high of Aug 19, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IJT in plain words

IJT is an index equity fund tracking the S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth. 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 0.18% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 355 positions, with the top ten at 10.1%. It sat 7.0% below its high of Aug 4, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IBB or IJT?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IBB returned +41.5% and IJT returned +17.6%, so IBB returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IBB or IJT?
IBB charges 0.44% a year and IJT charges 0.18%, so IJT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IBB and IJT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 36% of IBB and 0% of IJT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 3% 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.

IBB against IJT, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 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, IBB against IJT, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ibb-vs-ijt Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources