IVV vs IWO
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF
Which is better, IVV or IWO?
Large Cap Blend against Small Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IWO is less concentrated, with 6.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | IWO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.24% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $14.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 508 | 1,125 |
| YTD Return | +12.39%Best | +10.85% |
| 1Y Return | +16.61%Best | +12.22% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38%Best | +17.08% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51%Best | +4.90% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1%Best | 21.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5%Best | -60.3% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,844Best | $12,702 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 6.1%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Small Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 24, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 28, 2000 to Sep 18, 2026 (26.1 years).
IVV vs IWO growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 26.1 years both funds cover.
IVV vs IWO Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while IWO returned +12.22%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 10.85% for IWO.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.38% per year against +17.08% for IWO; over five years the annualized figures are +13.51% and +4.90% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.97% annualized vs +6.32%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.6% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -56.5% for IVV and -60.3% for IWO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.87. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while IWO charges 0.24%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $24 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.44% for IWO.
Holdings Overlap
0.1% of IVV's money is in holdings IWO also owns. 0.2% of IWO's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
We cannot see either book well enough to say how much of this pair is duplicated.
1 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 1,025 in IWO, against full books of 508 and 1,125.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 874 positions for IWO that do not appear in our book for IVV (92.2% of the fund), and 481 for IVV that do not appear in IWO (98.5%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in IWO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XTSLABlackrock Cash Funds: Treasury, Sl Agency Shares | 0.15% | 0.19% | 0.04% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and IWO you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or IWO?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while IWO charges 0.24%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or IWO?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs +12.22% for IWO, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +6.97% vs +6.32% for IWO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or IWO?
IWO has been the more volatile fund at 21.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs IWO -60.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and IWO?
IVV and IWO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.87, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or IWO?
IVV yields 1.06% while IWO yields 0.44%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IWO better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IWO is less concentrated, with 6.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.