Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

vsCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Across categories

IWF vs IWM: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, IWF returned +0.9% to IWM's +14.1%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about IWF and IWM

Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $124.7bn for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and $75.5bn for iShares Russell 2000 ETF.

At a glance
+0.9%
IWF total return, 1 year
+14.1%
IWM total return, 1 year
0.18%
IWF expense ratio
0.19%
IWM expense ratio

Pair scorecard

IWF costs 0.01 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 13.2 points; IWF is 1.7 times larger.

IWF vs IWM: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureIWFIWM
Return
Total return, 1 year+0.9%+14.1%
Drawdown
Below its high4.8%, high on Oct 6, 20267.6%, high on Aug 14, 2026
Benchmark
What it tracksRussell 1000 Growth IndexRussell 2000 Index
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.18%0.19%
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026$124.7bn$75.5bn
Holdings
Holdings in common0%
Top ten holdings, share of the fund57.5%3.3%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Oct 27, 2026. Method

Risk and return

Jun 2, 2000 to Oct 23, 2026 · 1,377 weekly returns
IWF IWM
Return
Total return edge IWM (slight) +629.2% +656.6%
Annualized edge Tie +7.8% +7.9%
Price return edge IWF (slight) +457.0% +438.6%
Risk
Volatility edge IWF 19.1% 22.3%
Max drawdown edge IWM (slight) −63.4% −57.7%
Downside capture 100.1% 100.5%
Beta 1.00 1.01
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe edge IWF (slight) 0.40 0.38
Sortino edge IWF (slight) 0.56 0.53
Treynor 0.149 0.106
Calmar edge IWM 0.12 0.14
Against the benchmark
Alpha −0.1% a year −0.1% a year
Alpha t-stat −0.58 −0.36
Information ratio −0.11 −0.02
Tracking error 1.0% 1.0%

Each against its own benchmark: IWF against VONG, Oct 1, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026; IWM against VTWO, Oct 1, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026.

Reading

IWM returned slightly more: +656.6% to +629.2%. IWF swung less: 19.1% to 22.3%. IWM fell slightly less at its worst: −57.7% to −63.4%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured
Open ↓
Risk and return: IWF vs IWM: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureIWFIWMEdgeHow it is measured
Return
Total return+629.2%+656.6%IWM (slight)Price change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized+7.8%+7.9%TieTotal return as a yearly rate.
Price return+457.0%+438.6%IWF (slight)Price change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility19.1%22.3%IWFSpread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation13.5%15.7%IWFLike volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown−63.4%−57.7%IWM (slight)Deepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture99.8%101.0%Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture100.1%100.5%Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta1.001.01Not an edgeHow far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared1.001.00Not an edgeShare of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe0.400.38IWF (slight)Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino0.560.53IWF (slight)Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor0.1490.106Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar0.120.14IWMAnnualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
BenchmarkVONGVTWOThe ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha−0.1% a year−0.1% a yearNot significantYearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat−0.58−0.36Not an edgeHow sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range−0.6% to +0.3%−0.6% to +0.4%Includes zeroThe 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio−0.11−0.02Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error1.0%1.0%Not an edgeHow far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 1,377 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

0%

By the books each fund has filed, IWF and IWM hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Oct 27, 2026.

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first IWF IWM
Only in one fund ↓
Only in IWF
NVIDIA 15.30%
APPLE 8.18%
MICROSOFT 5.94%
ALPHABET CLASS A 5.62%
BROADCOM INC 4.79%
ALPHABET CLASS C 4.53%
TESLA INC 3.58%
META PLATFORMS CLASS A 3.36%
Only in IWM
JFROG 0.37%
GLAUKOS 0.35%
TWIST BIOSCIENCE 0.35%
MOOG INC CLASS A 0.34%
BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES INC 0.33%
UMB FINANCIAL 0.33%
SM ENERGY 0.32%
10X GENOMICS CLASS A 0.31%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF
Where it sits Stock ETF Stock ETF
What it is Tracks the Russell 1000 growth Tracks the Russell 2000
Total return, 1 year +0.9% +14.1%
Its benchmark over the same days +1.1% (VONG) +14.3% (VTWO)
Gap to its benchmark −0.2 pts vs VONG −0.2 pts vs VTWO
Expense ratio 0.18% 0.19%
Already in the S&P 500 93.5% 0.0%
Holdings 374 1977
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 $124.7bn $75.5bn

IWF and IWM on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

Client brief · page 1 of 2 Report BR-3C80A35B4C

IWF and IWM do different jobs. What does each one do in a portfolio?

  1. What each follows. IWF follows Russell 1000 Growth Index and IWM follows Russell 2000 Index.
  2. Holdings in common. 0% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 27, 2026).
  3. One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 IWF returned +0.9% and IWM +14.1% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 13.2 points.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

IWF and IWM flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
IWF

IWF tracks the Russell 1000 growth. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +0.9% with distributions reinvested, against +1.1% for its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Growth Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 374 positions, with the top ten at 57.5%. It sat 4.8% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

IWM

IWM tracks the Russell 2000. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +14.1% with distributions reinvested, against +14.3% for its benchmark, the Russell 2000 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.19% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1,977 positions, with the top ten at 3.3%. It sat 7.6% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWF or IWM?
In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +0.9% and IWM +14.1%.
Which is cheaper, IWF or IWM?
IWF is cheaper, by 0.01 percentage points a year. That is about $1 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWF and IWM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 94% of IWF and 0% of IWM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds.
Other comparisons
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, IWF against IWM, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwf-vs-iwm

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.