IWO vs VTI
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. IWO delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IWO | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.24% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $15.0B | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 1,125 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +17.00% | +12.65% | |
| 1Y Return | +29.91% | +21.39% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.62% | +21.54% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.41% | +12.11% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.3% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 24, 2000 | May 24, 2001 |
IWO vs VTI Performance
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IWO returned +29.91% while VTI returned +21.39%. Year to date, IWO is up 17.00% versus a gain of 12.65% for VTI.
Over three years, IWO compounded at +18.62% per year against +21.54% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +6.41% and +12.11% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.07% annualized vs +6.56%. 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 15.3% for VTI. 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 -60.3% for IWO and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IWO charges 0.24% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $24 vs $3 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IWO currently yields 0.44% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
IWO and VTI share 736 holdings out of 3086 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IWO or VTI?
IWO has an expense ratio of 0.24% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $21 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IWO or VTI?
Over the past year IWO returned +29.91% vs +21.39% for VTI, so IWO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), IWO annualized +6.56% vs +8.07% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IWO or VTI?
IWO has been the more volatile fund at 21.6% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: IWO -60.3% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both IWO and VTI?
IWO and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IWO and VTI?
IWO and VTI share 736 common holdings with a 0.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3086 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWO or VTI?
IWO yields 0.44% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.