IWM vs VTWO
iShares Russell 2000 ETF vs Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF
Which is better, IWM or VTWO?
Nearly the same fund. VTWO costs less.
VTWO has a lower expense ratio. VTWO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 1.00.
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 | IWM | VTWO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.19% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $75.4B | $17.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.96% | 1.18% |
| Holdings | 3,982 | 2,006 |
| YTD Return | +13.55% | +13.70%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.15% | +16.36%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.75% | +19.96%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +4.69% | +4.86%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.1% | 19.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -42.3%Best | -42.4% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,576 | $12,678Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 3.3%Tie | 3.3%Tie |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 22, 2000 | Sep 20, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 22, 2010 to Nov 10, 2026 (16.1 years).
IWM vs VTWO 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 16.1 years both funds cover.
IWM vs VTWO Performance
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IWM returned +16.15% while VTWO returned +16.36%. Year to date, IWM is up 13.55% versus a gain of 13.70% for VTWO.
Over three years, IWM compounded at +19.75% per year against +19.96% for VTWO; over five years the annualized figures are +4.69% and +4.86% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VTWO has the edge at +10.12% annualized vs +9.86%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.1% compared with 19.0% for VTWO. 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 -42.3% for IWM and -42.4% for VTWO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 1.00. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IWM charges 0.19% per year while VTWO charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $19 vs $6 annually, a gap of $13 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IWM currently yields 0.96% against 1.18% for VTWO.
Holdings Overlap
96.9% of IWM's money is in holdings VTWO also owns. 95.0% of VTWO's money is in holdings IWM also owns.
Most of IWM is already inside VTWO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
1,932 positions in common, counted across the 1,971 positions we hold weights for in IWM and 1,990 in VTWO, against full books of 3,982 and 2,006.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 15 positions for VTWO that do not appear in our book for IWM (1.1% of the fund), and 15 for IWM that do not appear in VTWO (1.6%).
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 IWM | Weight in VTWO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TWSTTwist Bioscience Corp. | 0.34% | 0.42% | 0.08% |
| MOG.AMoog Inccommon Stock | 0.36% | 0.36% | 0.00% |
| BTSGBrightspring Health | 0.37% | 0.31% | 0.06% |
| UMBFUmb Financial Corp. | 0.33% | 0.32% | 0.01% |
| GKOSGlaukos Corp. | 0.33% | 0.31% | 0.02% |
| TXG10x Genomics Inc Com Usd 1 Cl A | 0.29% | 0.35% | 0.06% |
| SMSm Energy Co | 0.32% | 0.27% | 0.05% |
| EATBrinker Intl Inc | 0.31% | 0.28% | 0.03% |
| FCFSFirstcash Inc | 0.31% | 0.28% | 0.03% |
| KRYSKrystal Biotech Inc | 0.30% | 0.29% | 0.01% |
96.9% of IWM is already inside VTWO.
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, IWM or VTWO?
IWM has an expense ratio of 0.19% while VTWO charges 0.06%. VTWO is the cheaper option, by $13 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IWM or VTWO?
Over the past year IWM returned +16.15% vs +16.36% for VTWO, so VTWO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IWM annualized +9.86% vs +10.12% for VTWO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IWM or VTWO?
IWM has been the more volatile fund at 19.1% annualized versus 19.0% for VTWO. Worst drawdown: IWM -42.3% vs VTWO -42.4%.
Should I hold both IWM and VTWO?
IWM and VTWO have a monthly-return correlation of 1.00, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IWM and VTWO?
96.9% of IWM's money is in holdings VTWO also owns. 95.0% of VTWO's is in holdings IWM also owns. They hold 1,932 positions in common, counted across the 1,971 positions we hold weights for in IWM and 1,990 in VTWO.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWM or VTWO?
IWM yields 0.96% while VTWO yields 1.18%, so VTWO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTWO better than IWM?
VTWO has a lower expense ratio. VTWO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 1.00. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.