Which returned more over the last year, IWF or SLV?

In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and SLV returned +53.8%, so SLV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, IWF or SLV?

IWF charges 0.18% a year and SLV charges 0.50%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

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 SLV: how they differ

IWF is an equity index fund and SLV a commodity fund, and over the year SLV returned more, +53.8% against +7.0%.

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and iShares Silver Trust.

IWF and SLV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF	SLV iShares Silver Trust
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	iShares	iShares
What it is	Russell 1000 growth	Silver
Total return, 1 year	+7.0%	+53.8%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−10.5 pts	+36.3 pts
Expense ratio	0.18%	0.50%
Holdings	315	not filed

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.

SLV in plain words

SLV is a commodity fund tracking the Silver. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +53.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.50% a year. It sat 45.0% below its high of Jan 28, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWF or SLV?: In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and SLV returned +53.8%, so SLV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWF or SLV?: IWF charges 0.18% a year and SLV charges 0.50%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources