IWF vs VYM
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, IWF or VYM?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. IWF led over 3Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y and 5Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 56.8%.
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 | IWF | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $123.8B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.35% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 372 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +4.17% | +12.29%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.59% | +16.61%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.65%Best | +17.42% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.04% | +12.12%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.8% | 14.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -52.0%Best | -58.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,655 | $17,718Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 56.8% | 26.1%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 22, 2000 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 16, 2006 to Sep 17, 2026 (19.8 years).
IWF vs VYM 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 19.8 years both funds cover.
IWF vs VYM Performance
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IWF returned +6.59% while VYM returned +16.61%. Year to date, IWF is up 4.17% versus a gain of 12.29% for VYM.
Over three years, IWF compounded at +21.65% per year against +17.42% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.04% and +12.12% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IWF has the edge at +11.83% annualized vs +6.87%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.8% compared with 14.6% for VYM. 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 -52.0% for IWF and -58.8% for VYM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IWF charges 0.18% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $4 annually, a gap of $14 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IWF currently yields 0.35% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
12.8% of IWF's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 32.1% of VYM's money is in holdings IWF also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
76 positions in common, counted across the 367 positions we hold weights for in IWF and 557 in VYM, against full books of 372 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 452 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for IWF (65.0% of the fund), and 238 for IWF that do not appear in VYM (86.6%).
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 IWF | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 5.17% | 7.35% | 2.18% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 1.09% | 1.50% | 0.41% |
| HDHome Depot Inc/The | 0.73% | 1.34% | 0.61% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 0.11% | 1.80% | 1.69% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 0.08% | 1.66% | 1.58% |
| TXNTexas Instrument Inc | 0.71% | 1.02% | 0.31% |
| ORCLOracle Corp - Common | 0.77% | 0.90% | 0.13% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 0.12% | 1.38% | 1.26% |
| AMGNAmgen Inc. | 0.49% | 0.78% | 0.29% |
| CCitigroup Inc. | 0.10% | 0.89% | 0.79% |
32.1% of VYM is already inside IWF.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IWF or VYM?
IWF has an expense ratio of 0.18% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $14 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IWF or VYM?
Over the past year IWF returned +6.59% vs +16.61% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), IWF annualized +11.83% vs +6.87% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IWF or VYM?
IWF has been the more volatile fund at 16.8% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: IWF -52.0% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both IWF and VYM?
IWF and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IWF and VYM?
32.1% of VYM's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 32.1% of VYM's is in holdings IWF also owns. They hold 76 positions in common, counted across the 367 positions we hold weights for in IWF and 557 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWF or VYM?
IWF yields 0.35% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than IWF?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. IWF led over 3Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y and 5Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 56.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.