Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

vsCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Across categories

IWM vs SCHG: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, IWM returned +14.1% to SCHG's +6.8%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about IWM and SCHG

Net assets: $75.5bn on Oct 27, 2026 for iShares Russell 2000 ETF, and $63.0bn on Aug 31, 2026 for Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF.

At a glance
+14.1%
IWM total return, 1 year
+6.8%
SCHG total return, 1 year
0.19%
IWM expense ratio
0.04%
SCHG expense ratio

Pair scorecard

SCHG costs 0.15 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 7.3 points.

IWM vs SCHG: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureIWMSCHG
Return
Total return, 1 year+14.1%+6.8%
Drawdown
Below its high7.6%, high on Aug 14, 20263.5%, high on Oct 6, 2026
Benchmark
What it tracksRussell 2000 IndexDow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.19%0.04%
Net assets, IWM as of Oct 27, 2026 and SCHG as of Aug 31, 2026$75.5bn$63.0bn
Holdings
Holdings in common0%
Top ten holdings, share of the fund3.3%51.0%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026. Method

Risk and return

Dec 18, 2009 to Oct 23, 2026 · 879 weekly returns
IWM SCHG
Return
Total return edge SCHG +466.8% +1,156.7%
Annualized edge SCHG +10.8% +16.2%
Price return edge SCHG +350.7% +988.8%
Risk
Volatility edge SCHG 21.5% 18.5%
Max drawdown edge SCHG −40.2% −34.2%
Downside capture 100.5% 108.1%
Beta 1.01 1.10
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe edge SCHG 0.51 0.82
Sortino edge SCHG 0.75 1.22
Treynor 0.106 0.138
Calmar edge SCHG 0.27 0.47
Against the benchmark
Alpha −0.1% a year +0.8% a year
Alpha t-stat −0.36 0.65
Information ratio −0.02 0.40
Tracking error 1.0% 5.5%

Each against its own benchmark: IWM against VTWO, Oct 1, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026; SCHG against IVV, Dec 18, 2009 to Oct 23, 2026.

Reading

SCHG returned more: +1,156.7% to +466.8%. SCHG swung less: 18.5% to 21.5%. SCHG fell less at its worst: −34.2% to −40.2%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured
Open ↓
Risk and return: IWM vs SCHG: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureIWMSCHGEdgeHow it is measured
Return
Total return+466.8%+1,156.7%SCHGPrice change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized+10.8%+16.2%SCHGTotal return as a yearly rate.
Price return+350.7%+988.8%SCHGPrice change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility21.5%18.5%SCHGSpread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation14.8%12.5%SCHGLike volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown−40.2%−34.2%SCHGDeepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture101.0%121.1%Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture100.5%108.1%Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta1.011.10Not an edgeHow far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared1.000.92Not an edgeShare of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe0.510.82SCHGReturn above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino0.751.22SCHGReturn above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor0.1060.138Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar0.270.47SCHGAnnualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
BenchmarkVTWOIVVThe ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha−0.1% a year+0.8% a yearNot significantYearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat−0.360.65Not an edgeHow sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range−0.6% to +0.4%−1.7% to +3.4%Includes zeroThe 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio−0.020.40Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error1.0%5.5%Not an edgeHow far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 879 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

0%

By the books each fund has filed, IWM and SCHG hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026.

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first IWM SCHG
Only in one fund ↓
Only in IWM
JFROG 0.37%
GLAUKOS 0.35%
TWIST BIOSCIENCE 0.35%
MOOG INC CLASS A 0.34%
BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES INC 0.33%
UMB FINANCIAL 0.33%
SM ENERGY 0.32%
10X GENOMICS CLASS A 0.31%
Only in SCHG
NVIDIA Corp 10.67%
Apple Inc 9.29%
Microsoft Corp 7.52%
Amazon.com Inc 5.07%
Alphabet Inc 3.97%
Broadcom Inc 3.50%
Alphabet Inc 3.16%
Eli Lilly & Co 2.93%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Where it sits Stock ETF Stock ETF
What it is Tracks the Russell 2000 Tracks an index of U.S. Large-Cap Growth
Total return, 1 year +14.1% +6.8%
Its benchmark over the same days +14.3% (VTWO) +13.7% (IVV)
Gap to its benchmark −0.2 pts vs VTWO −6.9 pts vs IVV
Expense ratio 0.19% 0.04%
Already in the S&P 500 0.0% 94.7%
Holdings 1977 192
Net assets, IWM as of Oct 27, 2026 and SCHG as of Aug 31, 2026 $75.5bn $63.0bn

IWM and SCHG on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

Client brief · page 1 of 2 Report BR-11C605AEEC

IWM and SCHG do different jobs. What does each one do in a portfolio?

  1. What each follows. IWM follows Russell 2000 Index and SCHG follows Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index.
  2. Holdings in common. 0% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 27, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026).
  3. One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 IWM returned +14.1% and SCHG +6.8% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 7.3 points.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

IWM flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
IWM

IWM tracks the Russell 2000. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +14.1% with distributions reinvested, against +14.3% for its benchmark, the Russell 2000 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.19% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1,977 positions, with the top ten at 3.3%. It sat 7.6% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

SCHG

SCHG tracks an index of U.S. Large-Cap Growth. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +6.8% with distributions reinvested, against +13.7% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Aug 31, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 192 positions, with the top ten at 51.0%. It sat 3.5% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWM or SCHG?
In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWM returned +14.1% and SCHG +6.8%.
Which is cheaper, IWM or SCHG?
SCHG is cheaper, by 0.15 percentage points a year. That is about $15 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWM and SCHG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IWM and 95% of SCHG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds.
Other comparisons
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, IWM against SCHG, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwm-vs-schg

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.