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

ITOT vs IWB: how they differ

ITOT and IWB hold 97% of their weight in the same names.

iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF and iShares Russell 1000 ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ITOT and IWB hold 97% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ITOT and IWB both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingITOTIWB
NVIDIA7.32%7.26%
APPLE6.63%6.73%
MICROSOFT5.06%5.21%
AMAZON.COM INC3.41%3.49%
ALPHABET CLASS A2.70%2.77%
BROADCOM INC2.37%2.40%
ALPHABET CLASS C2.16%2.24%
META PLATFORMS CLASS A1.96%2.02%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY1.52%1.57%
TESLA INC1.41%1.52%
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO1.31%1.35%
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC CLASS B1.29%1.35%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ITOTOnly in IWB
SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PLC 0.26%SPOTIFY TECHNOLOGY 0.12%
NXP SEMICONDUCTORS NV 0.08%ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI PLC 0.07%
TE CONNECTIVITY PLC 0.08%NU HOLDINGS CLASS A 0.07%
AMRIZE AG 0.03%RESTAURANTS BRANDS INTERNATIONAL 0.04%
10X GENOMICS CLASS A 0.01%BROOKFIELD ASSET MANAGEMENT VOTING 0.03%
AAR 0.01%SOUTHERN COPPER CORP 0.03%
ABERCROMBIE AND FITCH CLASS A 0.01%ASCENDIS PHARMA 0.02%
ACADEMY SPORTS AND OUTDOORS 0.01%GFL ENVIRONMENTAL SUBORDINATE VOTI 0.02%

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.

ITOT and IWB on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ITOT
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
IWB
iShares Russell 1000 ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isCore S&P Total U.S. Stock MarketRussell 1000
Total return, 1 year+17.2%+16.7%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.3 pts−0.8 pts
Expense ratio0.03%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50088.3%91.9%
Holdings1167945

ITOT in plain words

ITOT is an index equity fund tracking the Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 88% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1167 positions, with the top ten at 34.6%.

IWB in plain words

IWB is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 945 positions, with the top ten at 35.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ITOT or IWB?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ITOT returned +17.2% and IWB returned +16.7%, so ITOT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ITOT or IWB?
ITOT charges 0.03% a year and IWB charges 0.15%, so ITOT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ITOT and IWB overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 88% of ITOT and 92% of IWB by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 97% 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.

ITOT against IWB, 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, ITOT against IWB, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/itot-vs-iwb Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources