IWF vs PWB: Differences, Returns & Fees
IWF and PWB hold 43% of their weight in the same names, and PWB returned +20.2% over the year. Net assets on Oct 20, 2026: $125.0bn for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and $2.6bn for Invesco Large Cap Growth ETF.
IWF costs 0.37 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 16.2 points; IWF is far larger, $125.0bn against $2.6bn.
| IWF | PWB | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.55% |
| Net assets | $125.0bn | $2.6bn |
| Total return, 1 year | +4.0% | +20.2% |
| What it tracks | Russell 1000 Growth Index | Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index |
| Holdings in common | 43% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 57.8% | 36.0% |
| Below its high | 5.2%, high on Oct 6, 2026 | 8.9%, high on Jun 22, 2026 |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Oct 19, 2026.
IWF and PWB are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- What each follows. IWF follows Russell 1000 Growth Index and PWB follows Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index.
- Holdings in common. 43% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 19, 2026).
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 20, 2026 IWF returned +4.0% and PWB +20.2% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 16.2 points.
Data as of Oct 20, 2026. The differences are picked by a fixed rule, in a fixed order; the PDF prints it. Page 2 has the returns, overlap, risks and sources.
Take this comparison to a client
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Not advice. The brief uses the figures on this page, with the data date and a report id. Saved comparisons are listed on your saved page; privacy.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWF and PWB hold 43% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Oct 19, 2026.
half
43% in common
On the same fields
IWF and PWB on the fields both publish, as of Oct 20, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
About IWF
IWF tracks the Russell 1000 growth. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +4.0% with distributions reinvested, against +4.1% 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 19, 2026, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 373 positions, with the top ten at 57.8%. It sat 5.2% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
About PWB
PWB tracks an index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.55% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 19, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 52 positions, with the top ten at 36.0%. It sat 8.9% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Oct 20, 2026.
Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +20.2% with distributions reinvested, against +15.0% for its benchmark, the Russell 3000 Index.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWF or PWB?
- In the year to Oct 20, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +4.0% and PWB +20.2%.
- Which is cheaper, IWF or PWB?
- IWF is cheaper, by 0.37 percentage points a year. That is about $37 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, IWF against PWB, data as of Oct 20, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwf-vs-pwb
ETFIQ. (Oct 20, 2026). IWF against PWB. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwf-vs-pwb
[IWF against PWB (ETFIQ, Oct 20, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwf-vs-pwb)
Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.