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

IJS vs IWD: how they differ

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

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Value ETF and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF.

What they hold in common

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

Positions IJS and IWD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJSIWD
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY1.68%0.13%
USD CASH0.05%0.12%
MATCH GROUP INC1.08%0.03%
QORVO0.37%0.03%
CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT INC0.67%0.02%
CARMAX INC0.95%0.02%
CASH COLLATERAL MSFUT USD0.03%0.02%
CONAGRA BRANDS0.78%0.02%
EASTMAN CHEMICAL0.86%0.02%
ELEMENT SOLUTIONS INC0.43%0.02%
EPAM SYSTEMS0.66%0.02%
GATES INDUSTRIAL PLC0.33%0.02%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJSOnly in IWD
SM ENERGY 0.96%AMAZON.COM INC 6.04%
JACKSON FINANCIAL CLASS A 0.81%APPLE 5.83%
MATSON INC 0.76%MICROSOFT 4.93%
MAGNOLIA OIL GAS CORP CLASS A 0.70%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC CLASS B 2.54%
VICTORIA S SECRET 0.64%JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 2.54%
ATLANTIC UNION BANKSHARES 0.61%EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP 1.85%
CORE NATURAL RESOURCES 0.55%JOHNSON & JOHNSON 1.73%
INSIGHT ENTERPRISES INC 0.52%INTEL CORPORATION 1.23%

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.

IJS and IWD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJS
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Value ETF
IWD
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isS&P Small-Cap 600 ValueRussell 1000 value
Total return, 1 year+22.1%+27.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+4.7 pts+9.9 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.18%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%90.2%
Holdings466814

IJS in plain words

IJS is an index equity fund tracking the S&P Small-Cap 600 Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.1% 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 466 positions, with the top ten at 9.7%. It sat 4.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IWD in plain words

IWD is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +27.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 814 positions, with the top ten at 29.0%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IJS or IWD?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJS returned +22.1% and IWD returned +27.4%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJS or IWD?
IJS charges 0.18% a year and IWD charges 0.18%, so IJS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJS and IWD overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJS and 90% of IWD 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.

IJS against IWD, 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, IJS against IWD, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ijs-vs-iwd Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources