Screener
SMCO vs IWB
Hilton Small-Midcap Opportunity ETF vs iShares Russell 1000 ETF
Key differences
- IWB costs 0.40% less per year.
- IWB is significantly larger than SMCO — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- SMCO 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
| SMCO | IWB | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.55% | 0.15% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $129M | $46.2B |
| Since | 2023 | 2000 |
| Dividend yield | 0.91% | 0.96% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +23.8% | +29.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +23.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +13.5% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 1.25 |
| Volatility 1Y | 15.73% | 11.91% |
| Max drawdown | -22.71% | -34.60% |
Similar to SMCO and IWB
Explore further