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

IDEV vs IWO: how they differ

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

iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF and iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

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

Positions IDEV and IWO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIDEVIWO
AIRBUS GROUP0.46%0.33%
LVMH0.39%0.24%
USD CASH0.13%0.14%
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY0.21%0.12%
NN GROUP0.08%0.10%
CREDIT AGRICOLE SA0.07%0.14%
SIEMENS ENERGY N AG0.43%0.07%
TERNA RETE ELETTRICA NAZIONALE0.05%0.08%
CONTINENTAL AG0.03%0.26%
AGL ENERGY LTD0.02%0.08%
INDRA SISTEMAS SA0.02%0.03%
SSR MINING0.02%0.04%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IDEVOnly in IWO
ASML HOLDING 2.29%MOOG INC CLASS A 0.69%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.22%GLAUKOS 0.65%
ROCHE PS PAR AG 1.02%JFROG 0.64%
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 0.98%BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES INC 0.62%
SHELL PLC 0.91%FIRSTCASH HOLDINGS INC 0.62%
MITSUBISHI UFJ FINANCIAL GROUP 0.88%BRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC 0.61%
NOVARTIS AG 0.87%INTERDIGITAL INC 0.60%
NESTLE SA 0.85%KRYSTAL BIOTECH 0.59%

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 and IWO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IDEV
iShares Core MSCI International Developed Markets ETF
IWO
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isCore MSCI International Developed MarketsRussell 2000 Growth
Total return, 1 year+18.7%+17.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.2 pts−0.5 pts
Expense ratio0.04%0.24%
Already in the S&P 5000.1%0.0%
Holdings1782970

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%.

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 Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 970 positions, with the top ten at 6.2%. It sat 7.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IDEV or IWO?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IDEV returned +18.7% and IWO returned +17.0%, so IDEV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IDEV or IWO?
IDEV charges 0.04% a year and IWO charges 0.24%, so IDEV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IDEV and IWO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IDEV and 0% of IWO 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.

IDEV against IWO, 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, IDEV against IWO, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/idev-vs-iwo Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources