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

In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and TLT returned −6.4%, so IWF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, IWF or TLT?

IWF charges 0.18% a year and TLT charges 0.15%, so TLT 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 TLT: how they differ

IWF and TLT hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and IWF returned more over the year.

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWF and TLT hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IWF	Only in TLT
NVIDIA 15.46%	TREASURY BOND (2OLD) 4.16%
APPLE 7.77%	TREASURY BOND (OLD) 4.05%
ALPHABET CLASS A 5.88%	TREASURY BOND (OTR) 1.03%
MICROSOFT 5.55%	TREASURY BOND 0.02%
BROADCOM INC 5.10%
ALPHABET CLASS C 4.77%
META PLATFORMS CLASS A 3.52%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY 3.35%

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 TLT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF	TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	iShares	iShares
What it is	Russell 1000 growth	20+ year Treasuries
Total return, 1 year	+7.0%	−6.4%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−10.5 pts	−23.9 pts
Expense ratio	0.18%	0.15%
Holdings	315	41

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.

TLT in plain words

TLT is a bond fund tracking the 20+ year Treasuries. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −6.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. It sat 42.9% below its high of Aug 4, 2020 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWF or TLT?: In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWF returned +7.0% and TLT returned −6.4%, so IWF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWF or TLT?: IWF charges 0.18% a year and TLT charges 0.15%, so TLT 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 TLT, 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 TLT, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwf-vs-tlt Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources