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 IWO: how they differ

IJR and IWO hold 39% of their weight in the same names, and IJR returned more over the year.

iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF and iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IJR and IWO hold 39% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IJR and IWO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJRIWO
GLAUKOS0.57%0.65%
BRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC0.52%0.61%
PROTAGONIST THERAPEUTICS0.50%0.59%
RYMAN HOSPITALITY PROPERTIES REIT0.47%0.55%
STONEX GROUP INC0.42%0.50%
TG THERAPEUTICS0.42%0.53%
ALKERMES0.44%0.40%
ESCO TECHNOLOGIES0.39%0.47%
FEDERAL SIGNAL CORP0.39%0.46%
ZURN ELKAY WATER SOLUTIONS CORP0.39%0.45%
PLEXUS CORP0.38%0.44%
MAGNOLIA OIL GAS CORP CLASS A0.36%0.42%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJROnly in IWO
CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS 0.62%MOOG INC CLASS A 0.69%
VIASAT INC 0.57%JFROG 0.64%
MATCH GROUP INC 0.56%BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES INC 0.62%
QORVO 0.51%FIRSTCASH HOLDINGS INC 0.62%
PAYCOM SOFTWARE 0.51%INTERDIGITAL INC 0.60%
FORMFACTOR INC 0.50%KRYSTAL BIOTECH 0.59%
CARMAX INC 0.49%PRAXIS PRECISION MEDICINES 0.56%
ELEMENT SOLUTIONS INC 0.45%TWIST BIOSCIENCE 0.54%

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 IWO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJR
iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF
IWO
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isS&P SmallCap 600Russell 2000 Growth
Total return, 1 year+19.9%+17.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+2.4 pts−0.5 pts
Expense ratio0.06%0.24%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings608970

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.

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, IJR or IWO?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJR returned +19.9% and IWO returned +17.0%, so IJR returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJR or IWO?
IJR charges 0.06% a year and IWO charges 0.24%, so IJR is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJR and IWO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJR and 0% of IWO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 39% 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 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, IJR against IWO, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ijr-vs-iwo Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources