IWB vs QDF: Differences, Returns & Fees
IWB and QDF hold 36% of their weight in the same names, and QDF returned +17.4% over the year. Net assets: $49.6bn on Oct 9, 2026 for iShares Russell 1000 ETF, and $2.2bn on Jul 31, 2026 for Northern Trust Quality Dividend ETF.
IWB costs 0.24 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 0.8 points; IWB is far larger, $48.3bn against $2.2bn.
| IWB | QDF | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.15% | 0.39% |
| Net assets, as of Jul 31, 2026 | $48.3bn | $2.2bn |
| Total return, 1 year | +16.6% | +17.4% |
| What it tracks | Russell 1000 Index | Northern Trust Quality Dividend Index |
| Holdings in common | 36% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 36.1% | 39.4% |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 9, 2026.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWB and QDF hold 36% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 9, 2026.
half
36% in common
On the same fields
IWB and QDF on the fields both publish, as of Oct 9, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
About IWB
IWB tracks the Russell 1000. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +16.6% with distributions reinvested, against +16.8% for its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 9, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1,025 positions, with the top ten at 36.1%.
About QDF
QDF tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.39% a year. By its holdings filed for Jul 31, 2026, 86% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 123 positions, with the top ten at 39.4%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWB or QDF?
- In the year to Oct 9, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWB returned +16.6% and QDF +17.4%.
- Which is cheaper, IWB or QDF?
- IWB is cheaper, by 0.24 percentage points a year. That is about $24 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, IWB against QDF, data as of Oct 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwb-vs-qdf
ETFIQ. (Oct 9, 2026). IWB against QDF. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwb-vs-qdf
[IWB against QDF (ETFIQ, Oct 9, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwb-vs-qdf)
Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.