Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWF vs IXUS: how they differ
IWF and IXUS hold 1% of their weight in the same names, and IXUS returned more over the year.
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWF and IXUS hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IWF | IXUS |
|---|---|---|
| SPOTIFY TECHNOLOGY | 0.25% | 0.18% |
| NU HOLDINGS CLASS A | 0.16% | 0.12% |
| BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY | 0.15% | 0.09% |
| RESTAURANTS BRANDS INTERNATIONAL | 0.05% | 0.06% |
| BROOKFIELD ASSET MANAGEMENT VOTING | 0.05% | 0.04% |
| HEICO | 0.04% | 0.05% |
| AMERICAN AIRLINES GROUP | 0.03% | 0.13% |
| HYATT HOTELS CORP CLASS A | 0.02% | 0.03% |
| AMERIPRISE FINANCE INC | 0.01% | 0.01% |
| AURA MINERALS INC | 0.01% | 0.01% |
| AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING INC | 0.12% | 0.01% |
| ESTEE LAUDER INC CLASS A | 0.01% | 0.11% |
| Only in IWF | Only in IXUS |
|---|---|
| NVIDIA 15.46% | TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING 4.49% |
| APPLE 7.77% | SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LTD 2.21% |
| ALPHABET CLASS A 5.88% | SK HYNIX 1.79% |
| MICROSOFT 5.55% | ASML HOLDING 1.55% |
| BROADCOM INC 5.10% | HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 0.84% |
| ALPHABET CLASS C 4.77% | TENCENT HOLDINGS 0.78% |
| META PLATFORMS CLASS A 3.52% | ROCHE PS PAR AG 0.70% |
| MICRON TECHNOLOGY 3.35% | ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 0.68% |
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.
| IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | IXUS iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | Russell 1000 growth | Core MSCI Total International Stock |
| Total return, 1 year | +7.0% | +22.2% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −10.5 pts | +4.7 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.07% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 93.6% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 315 | 2540 |
IWF in plain words
IWF is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.0% 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, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 315 positions, with the top ten at 57.3%. It sat 5.0% below its high of Jun 1, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
IXUS in plain words
IXUS is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI Total International Stock. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2540 positions, with the top ten at 14.3%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWF or IXUS?
- In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and IXUS returned +22.2%, so IXUS returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IWF or IXUS?
- IWF charges 0.18% a year and IXUS charges 0.07%, so IXUS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IWF and IXUS overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 94% of IWF and 0% of IXUS by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IWF against IXUS, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwf-vs-ixus Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources