IWO vs VYM
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, IWO or VYM?
Small Cap Growth against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. IWO led over 3Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y and 5Y. IWO is less concentrated, with 6.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 26.1%.
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 | IWO | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.24% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $14.6B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.44% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 1,125 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +10.25%Best | +10.24% |
| 1Y Return | +14.34% | +14.89%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.35%Best | +18.00% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.92% | +11.42%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.8% | 14.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -58.1%Best | -58.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,120 | $17,172Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 6.1%Best | 26.1% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Growth | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 24, 2000 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 16, 2006 to Sep 25, 2026 (19.9 years).
IWO 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 19.9 years both funds cover.
IWO vs VYM Performance
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) 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 IWO returned +14.34% while VYM returned +14.89%. Year to date, IWO is up 10.25% versus a gain of 10.24% for VYM.
Over three years, IWO compounded at +18.35% per year against +18.00% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +3.92% and +11.42% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IWO has the edge at +8.09% annualized vs +6.76%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.8% 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 -58.1% for IWO 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
IWO charges 0.24% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $24 vs $4 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IWO currently yields 0.44% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
7.8% of IWO's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.8% of VYM's money is in holdings IWO also owns.
IWO and VYM share little of their money.
51 positions in common, counted across the 1,025 positions we hold weights for in IWO and 557 in VYM, against full books of 1,125 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 480 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for IWO (96.3% of the fund), and 825 for IWO that do not appear in VYM (84.6%).
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 IWO | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| FCFSFirstcash Inc | 0.56% | 0.03% | 0.53% |
| MGYMagnolia Oil & Gas Corp | 0.39% | 0.02% | 0.37% |
| SXTSensient Technologies Corp | 0.37% | 0.02% | 0.35% |
| IBPInstalled Building Products | 0.37% | 0.02% | 0.35% |
| NENoble Corp Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.35% | 0.02% | 0.33% |
| AROCArchrock, Inc. | 0.35% | 0.02% | 0.33% |
| PIPRPiper Sandler Companies | 0.34% | 0.02% | 0.32% |
| CAKECheesecake Factory Inc/the | 0.33% | 0.02% | 0.31% |
| DKDelek Us Holdings Inc | 0.29% | 0.02% | 0.27% |
| HRIHerc Holdings Inc Com | 0.29% | 0.02% | 0.27% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IWO and VYM 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, IWO or VYM?
IWO has an expense ratio of 0.24% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $20 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IWO or VYM?
Over the past year IWO returned +14.34% vs +14.89% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), IWO annualized +8.09% vs +6.76% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IWO or VYM?
IWO has been the more volatile fund at 20.8% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: IWO -58.1% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both IWO and VYM?
IWO 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 IWO and VYM?
7.8% of IWO's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.8% of VYM's is in holdings IWO also owns. They hold 51 positions in common, counted across the 1,025 positions we hold weights for in IWO and 557 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWO or VYM?
IWO yields 0.44% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than IWO?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. IWO led over 3Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y and 5Y. IWO is less concentrated, with 6.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 26.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.