Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IDEV vs IGM: how they differ
IDEV and IGM hold 1% of their weight in the same names, and IGM returned more over the year.
iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF and iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IDEV and IGM hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IDEV | IGM |
|---|---|---|
| SHOPIFY SUBORDINATE VOTING CLASS A | 0.52% | 0.69% |
| ROCHE PS PAR AG | 1.02% | 0.18% |
| CELESTICA | 0.14% | 0.18% |
| USD CASH | 0.13% | 0.05% |
| TELENOR | 0.03% | 0.27% |
| COMPUTACENTER PLC | 0.02% | 0.02% |
| OPEN TEXT | 0.02% | 0.02% |
| VENTIA SERVICES GROUP LTD | 0.02% | 0.02% |
| BIC SA | 0.01% | 0.02% |
| BILLERUD KORSNAS | 0.01% | 0.02% |
| BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY | 0.01% | 0.05% |
| LAIR LIQUIDE SOCIETE ANONYME POUR | 0.41% | 0.01% |
| Only in IDEV | Only in IGM |
|---|---|
| ASML HOLDING 2.29% | MICROSOFT 10.11% |
| HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.22% | APPLE 9.14% |
| ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 0.98% | NVIDIA 8.89% |
| SHELL PLC 0.91% | BROADCOM INC 7.42% |
| MITSUBISHI UFJ FINANCIAL GROUP 0.88% | META PLATFORMS CLASS A 4.87% |
| NOVARTIS AG 0.87% | MICRON TECHNOLOGY 4.73% |
| NESTLE SA 0.85% | ALPHABET CLASS A 4.23% |
| ASTRAZENECA PLC 0.83% | ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES 3.66% |
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.
| IDEV iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF | IGM iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | Core MSCI International Developed Markets | Expanded Tech Sector |
| Total return, 1 year | +18.7% | +32.7% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +1.2 pts | +15.2 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.04% | 0.37% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 0.1% | 92.0% |
| Holdings | 1782 | 272 |
IDEV in plain words
IDEV is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI International Developed Markets. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.7% 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 Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1782 positions, with the top ten at 10.6%.
IGM in plain words
IGM is an index equity fund tracking the Expanded Tech Sector. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +32.7% 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 Sep 10, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 272 positions, with the top ten at 58.6%. It sat 5.1% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IDEV or IGM?
- In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IDEV returned +18.7% and IGM returned +32.7%, so IGM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IDEV or IGM?
- IDEV charges 0.04% a year and IGM charges 0.37%, so IDEV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IDEV and IGM overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IDEV and 92% of IGM 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IDEV against IGM, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/idev-vs-igm Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources