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

IJR vs ITOT: how they differ

IJR and ITOT hold 2% of their weight in the same names, and IJR returned more over the year.

iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF and iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IJR and ITOT hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IJR and ITOT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJRITOT
USD CASH0.08%0.09%
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY1.94%0.07%
AAR0.28%0.01%
ACADEMY SPORTS AND OUTDOORS0.20%0.01%
ACI WORLDWIDE0.30%0.01%
ACM RESEARCH CLASS A0.23%0.01%
ALKERMES0.44%0.01%
AMERICAN STATES WATER0.20%0.01%
AMERIS BANCORP0.30%0.01%
APPLE HOSPITALITY REIT INC0.20%0.01%
ARCHROCK0.32%0.01%
ARCOSA0.41%0.01%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJROnly in ITOT
UNITED COMMUNITY BANKS INC 0.24%NVIDIA 7.32%
FIRST BANCORP 0.23%APPLE 6.63%
WSFS FINANCIAL 0.23%MICROSOFT 5.06%
MOELIS CLASS A 0.23%AMAZON.COM INC 3.41%
ADT INC 0.23%ALPHABET CLASS A 2.70%
GENWORTH FINANCIAL INC 0.22%BROADCOM INC 2.37%
BADGER METER 0.21%ALPHABET CLASS C 2.16%
CINEMARK HOLDINGS INC 0.21%META PLATFORMS CLASS A 1.96%

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.

IJR and ITOT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJR
iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF
ITOT
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isS&P SmallCap 600Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market
Total return, 1 year+19.9%+17.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+2.4 pts−0.3 pts
Expense ratio0.06%0.03%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%88.3%
Holdings6081167

IJR in plain words

IJR is an index equity fund tracking the S&P SmallCap 600. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.06% 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 608 positions, with the top ten at 6.8%. It sat 5.5% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

ITOT in plain words

ITOT is an index equity fund tracking the Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 88% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1167 positions, with the top ten at 34.6%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IJR or ITOT?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJR returned +19.9% and ITOT returned +17.2%, so IJR returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJR or ITOT?
IJR charges 0.06% a year and ITOT charges 0.03%, so ITOT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJR and ITOT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJR and 88% of ITOT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 2% 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.

IJR against ITOT, 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, IJR against ITOT, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ijr-vs-itot Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources