Which returned more over the last year, IWO or LQD?

In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWO returned +17.0% and LQD returned −2.7%, so IWO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, IWO or LQD?

IWO charges 0.24% a year and LQD charges 0.14%, so LQD 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

IWO vs LQD: how they differ

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

iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IWO and LQD 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 IWO	Only in LQD
MOOG INC CLASS A 0.69%	BLK CSH FND TREASURY SL AGENCY 0.88%
GLAUKOS 0.65%	ANHEUSER-BUSCH COMPANIES LLC 0.12%
JFROG 0.64%	DEUTSCHE TELEKOM INTERNATIONAL FIN 0.11%
BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH SERVICES INC 0.62%	CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING L 144A 0.10%
FIRSTCASH HOLDINGS INC 0.62%	JPMORGAN CHASE & CO MTN 0.09%
BRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC 0.61%	BRITISH TELECOMMUNICATIONS PLC 0.08%
INTERDIGITAL INC 0.60%	MORGAN STANLEY (FXD-FRN) MTN 0.08%
KRYSTAL BIOTECH 0.59%	CITIGROUP INC (FX-FRN) 0.07%

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.

IWO and LQD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	IWO iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF	LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	iShares	iShares
What it is	Russell 2000 Growth	US investment grade bonds
Total return, 1 year	+17.0%	−2.7%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−0.5 pts	−20.2 pts
Expense ratio	0.24%	0.14%
Holdings	970	3149

IWO in plain words

IWO is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% 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 970 positions, with the top ten at 6.2%. It sat 7.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

LQD in plain words

LQD is a bond fund tracking the US investment grade bonds. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −2.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.14% a year. It sat 6.4% below its high of Sep 22, 2021 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IWO or LQD?: In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWO returned +17.0% and LQD returned −2.7%, so IWO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IWO or LQD?: IWO charges 0.24% a year and LQD charges 0.14%, so LQD 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.

IWO against LQD, 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, IWO against LQD, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/iwo-vs-lqd Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources