Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

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

IWM vs XLK: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, IWM returned +14.1% to XLK's +27.1%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about IWM and XLK

Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $75.5bn for iShares Russell 2000 ETF and $125.0bn for State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF.

At a glance
+14.1%
IWM total return, 1 year
+27.1%
XLK total return, 1 year
0.19%
IWM expense ratio
0.08%
XLK expense ratio

Pair scorecard

XLK costs 0.11 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 13.0 points; XLK is 1.7 times larger.

IWM vs XLK: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureIWMXLK
Return
Total return, 1 year+14.1%+27.1%
Drawdown
Below its high7.6%, high on Aug 14, 20265.4%, high on Oct 6, 2026
Benchmark
What it tracksRussell 2000 IndexTechnology Select Sector Index
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.19%0.08%
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026$75.5bn$125.0bn
Holdings
Holdings in common0%
Top ten holdings, share of the fund3.3%64.6%

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

Risk and return

Jun 2, 2000 to Oct 23, 2026 · 1,377 weekly returns
IWM XLK
Return
Total return edge XLK +656.6% +820.6%
Annualized edge XLK (slight) +7.9% +8.7%
Price return edge XLK +438.6% +580.6%
Risk
Volatility edge IWM (slight) 22.3% 23.0%
Max drawdown edge IWM −57.7% −79.1%
Downside capture 100.5% 113.0%
Beta 1.01 1.15
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe edge XLK (slight) 0.38 0.40
Sortino edge XLK (slight) 0.53 0.57
Treynor 0.106 0.094
Calmar edge IWM 0.14 0.11
Against the benchmark
Alpha −0.1% a year +1.6% a year
Alpha t-stat −0.36 0.67
Information ratio −0.02 0.22
Tracking error 1.0% 12.6%

Each against its own benchmark: IWM against VTWO, Oct 1, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026; XLK against SPY, Dec 31, 1998 to Oct 23, 2026.

Reading

XLK returned more: +820.6% to +656.6%. IWM swung slightly less: 22.3% to 23.0%. IWM fell less at its worst: −57.7% to −79.1%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured
Open ↓
Risk and return: IWM vs XLK: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureIWMXLKEdgeHow it is measured
Return
Total return+656.6%+820.6%XLKPrice change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized+7.9%+8.7%XLK (slight)Total return as a yearly rate.
Price return+438.6%+580.6%XLKPrice change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility22.3%23.0%IWM (slight)Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation15.7%16.2%IWM (slight)Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown−57.7%−79.1%IWMDeepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture101.0%138.8%Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture100.5%113.0%Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta1.011.15Not an edgeHow far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared1.000.73Not an edgeShare of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe0.380.40XLK (slight)Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino0.530.57XLK (slight)Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor0.1060.094Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar0.140.11IWMAnnualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
BenchmarkVTWOSPYThe ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha−0.1% a year+1.6% a yearNot significantYearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat−0.360.67Not an edgeHow sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range−0.6% to +0.4%−3.0% to +6.1%Includes zeroThe 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio−0.020.22Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error1.0%12.6%Not an edgeHow far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 1,377 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

0%

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

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first IWM XLK
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 XLK
NVIDIA CORP 15.22%
APPLE INC 14.62%
MICROSOFT CORP 11.38%
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES 4.78%
BROADCOM INC 4.70%
MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC 4.02%
INTEL CORP 2.72%
PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC A 2.67%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF XLK State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
Where it sits Stock ETF Stock ETF
What it is Tracks the Russell 2000 Tracks an index of Technology
Total return, 1 year +14.1% +27.1%
Its benchmark over the same days +14.3% (VTWO) +13.6% (SPY)
Gap to its benchmark −0.2 pts vs VTWO +13.5 pts vs SPY
Expense ratio 0.19% 0.08%
Already in the S&P 500 0.0% 99.9%
Holdings 1977 76
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 $75.5bn $125.0bn

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

Client brief · page 1 of 2 Report BR-82869F58E2

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

  1. What each follows. IWM follows Russell 2000 Index and XLK follows Technology Select Sector Index.
  2. Holdings in common. 0% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 27, 2026).
  3. One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 IWM returned +14.1% and XLK +27.1% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 13.0 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 and XLK 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.

XLK

XLK tracks an index of Technology. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +27.1% with distributions reinvested, against +13.6% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 76 positions, with the top ten at 64.6%. It sat 5.4% below its high of Oct 6, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWM or XLK?
In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWM returned +14.1% and XLK +27.1%.
Which is cheaper, IWM or XLK?
XLK is cheaper, by 0.11 percentage points a year. That is about $11 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IWM and XLK overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IWM and 100% of XLK by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds.
Other comparisons
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

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

Open data →

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