Screener
ACSG vs IWO
American Century Small Cap Growth Insights ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Key differences
- IWO costs 0.25% less per year.
- IWO is significantly larger than ACSG — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- ACSG follows a active selection strategy; IWO uses index tracking.
- IWO has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| ACSG | IWO | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.49% | 0.24% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $15M | $13.9B |
| Since | 2025 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | — | 0.42% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +40.1% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +18.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +5.9% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.72 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 21.33% |
| Max drawdown | -13.28% | -42.01% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to ACSG and IWO
Explore further