Screener
IWF vs IWO
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Key differences
- IWF costs 0.06% less per year.
- IWF is significantly larger than IWO — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, IWF has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| IWF | IWO | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.18% | 0.24% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $124.7B | $13.9B |
| Since | 2000 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | 0.35% | 0.42% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +27.5% | +40.1% |
| CAGR 3Y | +26.4% | +18.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | +15.5% | +5.9% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.13 | 0.72 |
| Volatility 1Y | 15.55% | 21.33% |
| Max drawdown | -32.72% | -42.01% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to IWF and IWO
Explore further