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

IWF vs PFF: how they differ

IWF and PFF hold 4% of their weight in the same names, and IWF returned more over the year.

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWF and PFF hold 4% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IWF and PFF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIWFPFF
ALPHABET CLASS A5.88%2.24%
ORACLE0.80%2.31%
BOEING0.31%3.54%
BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY0.15%0.61%
MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INC0.12%0.89%
CITIGROUP0.11%0.37%
ARES MANAGEMENT CLASS A0.08%0.61%
BANK OF AMERICA0.09%0.06%
KKR AND CO INC0.05%0.15%
CHARLES SCHWAB0.04%0.19%
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP0.02%0.24%
EQUITABLE HOLDINGS0.02%0.09%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IWFOnly in PFF
NVIDIA 15.46%HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CONV PR 2.06%
APPLE 7.77%ALBEMARLE CORP 1.12%
MICROSOFT 5.55%BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES UNITS 0.74%
BROADCOM INC 5.10%NEXTERA ENERGY UNITS 0.70%
ALPHABET CLASS C 4.77%BRUKER CORPORATION 0.53%
META PLATFORMS CLASS A 3.52%PPL CORPORATION 0.51%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY 3.35%AT&T INC 0.41%
TESLA INC 3.22%STRIVE INC 0.38%

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 and PFF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
PFF
iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isRussell 1000 growthPreferred and Income Securities
Total return, 1 year+7.0%−0.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−10.5 pts−18.3 pts
Expense ratio0.18%0.45%
Already in the S&P 50093.6%21.6%
Holdings315461

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.

PFF in plain words

PFF is an index equity fund tracking the Preferred and Income Securities. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −0.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.45% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 22% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 461 positions, with the top ten at 23.1%. It sat 3.2% below its high of May 8, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWF or PFF?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and PFF returned −0.8%, so IWF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWF or PFF?
IWF charges 0.18% a year and PFF charges 0.45%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWF and PFF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 94% of IWF and 22% of PFF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 4% 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.

IWF against PFF, 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, IWF against PFF, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwf-vs-pff Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources