IMCB vs IWR: Differences, Returns & Fees
IMCB and IWR hold 66% of their weight in the same names, and IMCB returned +19.2% over the year. Net assets on Oct 20, 2026: $1.7bn for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF and $57.0bn for iShares Russell Mid-Cap ETF.
IMCB costs 0.14 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 4.1 points; IWR is far larger, $57.0bn against $1.7bn.
| IMCB | IWR | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.04% | 0.18% |
| Net assets | $1.7bn | $57.0bn |
| Total return, 1 year | +19.2% | +15.1% |
| What it tracks | Morningstar US Mid Cap Index | Russell Midcap Index |
| Holdings in common | 66% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 7.9% | 6.8% |
| Below its high | 3.3%, high on Aug 14, 2026 | 4.3%, high on Aug 14, 2026 |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Oct 19, 2026.
IMCB and IWR are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- What each follows. IMCB follows Morningstar US Mid Cap Index and IWR follows Russell Midcap Index.
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 20, 2026 IMCB returned +19.2% and IWR +15.1% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 4.1 points.
- Cost. IMCB charges 0.04% of assets a year and IWR 0.18%, a gap of 0.14 points.
Data as of Oct 20, 2026. The differences are picked by a fixed rule, in a fixed order; the PDF prints it. Page 2 has the returns, overlap, risks and sources.
Take this comparison to a client
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Not advice. The brief uses the figures on this page, with the data date and a report id. Saved comparisons are listed on your saved page; privacy.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IMCB and IWR hold 66% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Oct 19, 2026.
half
66% in common
On the same fields
IMCB and IWR on the fields both publish, as of Oct 20, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
About IMCB
IMCB tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +19.2% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 19, 2026, 86% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 394 positions, with the top ten at 7.9%. It sat 3.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
About IWR
IWR tracks an index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 19, 2026, 62% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 825 positions, with the top ten at 6.8%. It sat 4.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +15.1% with distributions reinvested, against +15.0% for its benchmark, the Russell 3000 Index.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IMCB or IWR?
- In the year to Oct 20, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IMCB returned +19.2% and IWR +15.1%.
- Which is cheaper, IMCB or IWR?
- IMCB is cheaper, by 0.14 percentage points a year. That is about $14 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, IMCB against IWR, data as of Oct 20, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/imcb-vs-iwr
ETFIQ. (Oct 20, 2026). IMCB against IWR. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/imcb-vs-iwr
[IMCB against IWR (ETFIQ, Oct 20, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/imcb-vs-iwr)
Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.