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

IJT vs IWF: how they differ

IJT and IWF hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and IJT returned more over the year.

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

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IJT and IWF hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IJT and IWF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJTIWF
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY0.76%0.15%
CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS1.29%0.03%
FORMFACTOR INC1.03%0.03%
EVERUS CONSTRUCTION GROUP0.69%0.02%
POWELL INDUSTRIES INC0.59%0.02%
USD CASH0.02%0.05%
CASH COLLATERAL MSFUT USD0.01%0.02%
ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES0.82%0.01%
ETSY0.80%0.01%
KARMAN HOLDINGS INC0.37%0.01%
MADISON SQUARE GARDEN SPORTS CLASS0.83%0.01%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJTOnly in IWF
VIASAT INC 1.19%NVIDIA 15.46%
BRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC 1.09%APPLE 7.77%
PROTAGONIST THERAPEUTICS 1.03%ALPHABET CLASS A 5.88%
RYMAN HOSPITALITY PROPERTIES REIT 0.98%MICROSOFT 5.55%
ALKERMES 0.91%BROADCOM INC 5.10%
STONEX GROUP INC 0.87%ALPHABET CLASS C 4.77%
TG THERAPEUTICS 0.86%META PLATFORMS CLASS A 3.52%
ESCO TECHNOLOGIES 0.82%MICRON TECHNOLOGY 3.35%

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.

IJT and IWF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJT
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isS&P Small-Cap 600 GrowthRussell 1000 growth
Total return, 1 year+17.6%+7.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+0.1 pts−10.5 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.18%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%93.6%
Holdings355315

IJT in plain words

IJT is an index equity fund tracking the S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% 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 355 positions, with the top ten at 10.1%. It sat 7.0% below its high of Aug 4, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IWF in plain words

IWF is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.0% 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, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 315 positions, with the top ten at 57.3%. It sat 5.0% below its high of Jun 1, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IJT or IWF?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJT returned +17.6% and IWF returned +7.0%, so IJT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJT or IWF?
IJT charges 0.18% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so IJT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJT and IWF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJT and 94% of IWF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 0% 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.

IJT against IWF, 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, IJT against IWF, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ijt-vs-iwf Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources