Screener
ENHU vs IWB
iShares Enhanced Large Cap Core Active ETF vs iShares Russell 1000 ETF
Key differences
- IWB costs 0.07% less per year.
- IWB is significantly larger than ENHU — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- ENHU follows a active selection strategy; IWB uses index tracking.
- IWB has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| ENHU | IWB | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.22% | 0.15% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $9M | $46.2B |
| Since | 2025 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | — | 0.96% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +28.3% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +22.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +13.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 1.21 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 12.07% |
| Max drawdown | -8.98% | -34.60% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to ENHU and IWB
Explore further