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 IWM: how they differ

IJT and IWM hold 32% of their weight in the same names, and IWM returned more over the year.

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF and iShares Russell 2000 ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IJT and IWM hold 32% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IJT and IWM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIJTIWM
GLAUKOS0.81%0.32%
BRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC1.09%0.31%
VIASAT INC1.19%0.31%
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY0.76%0.29%
PROTAGONIST THERAPEUTICS1.03%0.29%
RYMAN HOSPITALITY PROPERTIES REIT0.98%0.27%
TG THERAPEUTICS0.86%0.26%
ALKERMES0.91%0.25%
STONEX GROUP INC0.87%0.25%
ARCOSA0.54%0.24%
ESCO TECHNOLOGIES0.82%0.23%
FEDERAL SIGNAL CORP0.82%0.23%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IJTOnly in IWM
CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS 1.29%MOOG INC CLASS A 0.34%
FORMFACTOR INC 1.03%UMB FINANCIAL 0.34%
MADISON SQUARE GARDEN SPORTS CLASS 0.83%CYTOKINETICS 0.32%
ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES 0.82%JFROG 0.32%
ETSY 0.80%BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES INC 0.31%
EVERUS CONSTRUCTION GROUP 0.69%FIRSTCASH HOLDINGS INC 0.31%
LYFT CLASS A 0.67%HUT CORP 0.31%
QORVO 0.67%SM ENERGY 0.31%

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 IWM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IJT
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isS&P Small-Cap 600 GrowthRussell 2000
Total return, 1 year+17.6%+21.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+0.1 pts+3.7 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.19%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings3551749

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.

IWM in plain words

IWM is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.19% 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 1749 positions, with the top ten at 3.2%. It sat 5.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IJT or IWM?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IJT returned +17.6% and IWM returned +21.2%, so IWM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IJT or IWM?
IJT charges 0.18% a year and IWM charges 0.19%, so IJT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IJT and IWM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IJT and 0% of IWM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 32% 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 IWM, 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 IWM, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ijt-vs-iwm Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources