Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWM vs PFF: how they differ
IWM and PFF hold 4% of their weight in the same names, and IWM returned more over the year.
iShares Russell 2000 ETF and iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWM and PFF hold 4% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IWM | PFF |
|---|---|---|
| BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES INC | 0.31% | 0.74% |
| BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY | 0.29% | 0.61% |
| JACKSON FINANCIAL CLASS A | 0.28% | 0.27% |
| VSE CORP | 0.18% | 0.22% |
| UMB FINANCIAL | 0.34% | 0.15% |
| FLAGSTAR BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | 0.13% | 0.23% |
| TELEPHONE AND DATA SYSTEMS | 0.12% | 0.17% |
| TEXAS CAPITAL BANCSHARES | 0.14% | 0.12% |
| WESBANCO | 0.12% | 0.11% |
| SL GREEN REALTY REIT CORP | 0.12% | 0.09% |
| SPIRE INC | 0.16% | 0.09% |
| ATLANTIC UNION BANKSHARES | 0.19% | 0.08% |
| Only in IWM | Only in PFF |
|---|---|
| MOOG INC CLASS A 0.34% | BOEING CO 3.54% |
| CYTOKINETICS 0.32% | ORACLE CORPORATION 2.31% |
| GLAUKOS 0.32% | SUPER MICRO COMPUTER INC 2.30% |
| JFROG 0.32% | ALPHABET INC 2.24% |
| BRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC 0.31% | HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CONV PR 2.06% |
| FIRSTCASH HOLDINGS INC 0.31% | ALBEMARLE CORP 1.12% |
| HUT CORP 0.31% | MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INCORPORATED 0.89% |
| SM ENERGY 0.31% | NEXTERA ENERGY UNITS 0.70% |
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.
| IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | PFF iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | iShares |
| What it is | Russell 2000 | Preferred and Income Securities |
| Total return, 1 year | +21.2% | −0.8% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +3.7 pts | −18.3 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.19% | 0.45% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 0.0% | 21.6% |
| Holdings | 1749 | 461 |
IWM in plain words
IWM is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.19% 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 1749 positions, with the top ten at 3.2%. It sat 5.3% below its high of Aug 14, 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, IWM or PFF?
- In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWM returned +21.2% and PFF returned −0.8%, so IWM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IWM or PFF?
- IWM charges 0.19% a year and PFF charges 0.45%, so IWM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IWM and PFF overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IWM 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IWM against PFF, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwm-vs-pff Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources