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 IWD: how they differ

ITOT and IWD hold 60% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.

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

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ITOT and IWD hold 60% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ITOT and IWD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingITOTIWD
APPLE6.63%5.83%
MICROSOFT5.06%4.93%
AMAZON.COM INC3.41%6.04%
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO1.31%2.54%
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC CLASS B1.29%2.54%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP0.94%1.85%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON0.88%1.73%
META PLATFORMS CLASS A1.96%0.69%
INTEL CORPORATION0.68%1.23%
WALMART INC0.64%1.14%
ABBVIE0.62%1.12%
CISCO SYSTEMS INC0.59%1.14%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ITOTOnly in IWD
NVIDIA 7.32%GFL ENVIRONMENTAL SUBORDINATE VOTI 0.04%
ALPHABET CLASS A 2.70%SOUTHERN COPPER CORP 0.04%
BROADCOM INC 2.37%IREN 0.03%
ALPHABET CLASS C 2.16%RESTAURANTS BRANDS INTERNATIONAL 0.03%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY 1.52%AMDOCS 0.02%
TESLA INC 1.41%CHIME FINANCIAL CLASS A 0.02%
ELI LILLY 1.23%GLOBALFOUNDRIES 0.02%
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES 1.14%MILLICOM INTERNATIONAL CELLULAR 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 IWD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ITOT
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
IWD
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isCore S&P Total U.S. Stock MarketRussell 1000 value
Total return, 1 year+17.2%+27.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.3 pts+9.9 pts
Expense ratio0.03%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50088.3%90.2%
Holdings1167814

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%.

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. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. 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, ITOT or IWD?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ITOT returned +17.2% and IWD returned +27.4%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ITOT or IWD?
ITOT charges 0.03% a year and IWD charges 0.18%, so ITOT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ITOT and IWD overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 88% of ITOT and 90% of IWD by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 60% 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 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, ITOT against IWD, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/itot-vs-iwd Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources