Skip to content

IEMG vs. IWP: What’s The Difference?

The iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) and the iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) are both among the Top 100 ETFs. IEMG is a iShares Diversified Emerging Mkts fund and IWP is a iShares Mid-Cap Growth fund. So, what’s the difference between IEMG and IWP? And which fund is better?

The expense ratio of IEMG is 0.13 percentage points lower than IWP’s (0.11% vs. 0.24%). IEMG also has a lower exposure to the technology sector and a lower standard deviation. Overall, IEMG has provided lower returns than IWP over the past ten years.

In this article, we’ll compare IEMG vs. IWP. We’ll look at annual returns and performance, as well as at their risk metrics and holdings. Moreover, I’ll also discuss IEMG’s and IWP’s portfolio growth, fund composition, and industry exposure and examine how these affect their overall returns.

TIP: Keep track of all your investments with Personal Capital. I use this amazing tool to aggregate all investments in one place and make sure I'm on track to financial freedom. Oh, and did I mention it's free? Try it out here (link to Personal Capital).

Summary

IEMGIWP
NameiShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETFiShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
CategoryDiversified Emerging MktsMid-Cap Growth
IssueriSharesiShares
AUM83.68B15.7B
Avg. Return7.41%16.75%
Div. Yield1.78%0.26%
Expense Ratio0.11%0.24%

The iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) is a Diversified Emerging Mkts fund that is issued by iShares. It currently has 83.68B total assets under management and has yielded an average annual return of 7.41% over the past 10 years. The fund has a dividend yield of 1.78% with an expense ratio of 0.11%.

The iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) is a Mid-Cap Growth fund that is issued by iShares. It currently has 15.7B total assets under management and has yielded an average annual return of 16.75% over the past 10 years. The fund has a dividend yield of 0.26% with an expense ratio of 0.24%.

IEMG’s dividend yield is 1.52% higher than that of IWP (1.78% vs. 0.26%). Also, IEMG yielded on average 9.34% less per year over the past decade (7.41% vs. 16.75%). The expense ratio of IEMG is 0.13 percentage points lower than IWP’s (0.11% vs. 0.24%).

FYI: The best way I've found to invest in ETFs is through M1 Finance. It's free and you even get an instant line of credit! Have a look here (link to M1 Finance).

Fund Composition

Industry Exposure

IEMG vs. IWP - Industry Exposure

IEMGIWP
Technology20.44%33.88%
Industrials5.92%14.09%
Energy4.71%1.51%
Communication Services11.41%6.32%
Utilities2.13%0.16%
Healthcare5.73%16.79%
Consumer Defensive5.68%2.32%
Real Estate2.75%2.46%
Financial Services16.9%4.52%
Consumer Cyclical15.67%16.09%
Basic Materials8.64%1.86%

The iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has the most exposure to the Technology sector at 20.44%. This is followed by Financial Services and Consumer Cyclical at 16.9% and 15.67% respectively. Real Estate (2.75%), Energy (4.71%), and Consumer Defensive (5.68%) only make up 13.14% of the fund’s total assets.

IEMG’s mid-section with moderate exposure is comprised of Healthcare, Industrials, Basic Materials, Communication Services, and Consumer Cyclical stocks at 5.73%, 5.92%, 8.64%, 11.41%, and 15.67%.

The iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) has the most exposure to the Technology sector at 33.88%. This is followed by Healthcare and Consumer Cyclical at 16.79% and 16.09% respectively. Energy (1.51%), Basic Materials (1.86%), and Consumer Defensive (2.32%) only make up 5.69% of the fund’s total assets.

IWP’s mid-section with moderate exposure is comprised of Real Estate, Financial Services, Communication Services, Industrials, and Consumer Cyclical stocks at 2.46%, 4.52%, 6.32%, 14.09%, and 16.09%.

IEMG is 13.44% less exposed to the Technology sector than IWP (20.44% vs 33.88%). IEMG’s exposure to Financial Services and Consumer Cyclical stocks is 12.38% higher and 0.42% lower respectively (16.9% vs. 4.52% and 15.67% vs. 16.09%). In total, Real Estate, Energy, and Consumer Defensive also make up 6.85% more of the fund’s holdings compared to IWP (13.14% vs. 6.29%).

Holdings

IEMG - Holdings

IEMG HoldingsWeight
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd5.37%
Tencent Holdings Ltd4.42%
Alibaba Group Holding Ltd Ordinary Shares4.38%
Samsung Electronics Co Ltd3.49%
Meituan1.52%
Naspers Ltd Class N0.93%
Vale SA0.91%
Reliance Industries Ltd Shs Dematerialised0.83%
China Construction Bank Corp Class H0.77%
Infosys Ltd0.74%

IEMG’s Top Holdings are Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd, Tencent Holdings Ltd, Alibaba Group Holding Ltd Ordinary Shares, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd, and Meituan at 5.37%, 4.42%, 4.38%, 3.49%, and 1.52%.

Naspers Ltd Class N (0.93%), Vale SA (0.91%), and Reliance Industries Ltd Shs Dematerialised (0.83%) have a slightly smaller but still significant weight. China Construction Bank Corp Class H and Infosys Ltd are also represented in the IEMG’s holdings at 0.77% and 0.74%.

IWP - Holdings

IWP HoldingsWeight
IDEXX Laboratories Inc1.3%
DocuSign Inc1.3%
Roku Inc Class A1.29%
Match Group Inc1.06%
Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc1.06%
Pinterest Inc1.05%
Veeva Systems Inc Class A1.04%
Palantir Technologies Inc Ordinary Shares – Class A1.04%
Lululemon Athletica Inc1.01%
DexCom Inc1.0%

IWP’s Top Holdings are IDEXX Laboratories Inc, DocuSign Inc, Roku Inc Class A, Match Group Inc, and Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc at 1.3%, 1.3%, 1.29%, 1.06%, and 1.06%.

Pinterest Inc (1.05%), Veeva Systems Inc Class A (1.04%), and Palantir Technologies Inc Ordinary Shares – Class A (1.04%) have a slightly smaller but still significant weight. Lululemon Athletica Inc and DexCom Inc are also represented in the IWP’s holdings at 1.01% and 1.0%.

NOTE: The easiest way to add diversification to your portfolio is to invest in real estate through Fundrise. You can become private real estate investor without the burden of property management! Check it out here (link to Fundrise).

Risk Analysis

IEMGIWP
Mean Return01.27
R-squared087.01
Std. Deviation016.05
Alpha0-1.03
Beta01.1
Sharpe Ratio00.91
Treynor Ratio012.98

The iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has a Beta of 0 with a Alpha of 0 and a Mean Return of 0. Its Sharpe Ratio is 0 while IEMG’s Standard Deviation is 0. Furthermore, the fund has a Treynor Ratio of 0 and a R-squared of 0.

The iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) has a Mean Return of 1.27 with a Treynor Ratio of 12.98 and a Standard Deviation of 16.05. Its R-squared is 87.01 while IWP’s Beta is 1.1. Furthermore, the fund has a Sharpe Ratio of 0.91 and a Alpha of -1.03.

IEMG’s Mean Return is 1.27 points lower than that of IWP and its R-squared is 87.01 points lower. With a Standard Deviation of 0, IEMG is slightly less volatile than IWP. The Alpha and Beta of IEMG are 1.03 points higher and 1.10 points lower than IWP’s Alpha and Beta.

FYI: Another great way to get exposure to the real estate sector is by investing in real estate debt. Groundfloor offers fantastic short-term, high-yield bonds that can add diversification to your portfolio!

Performance

Annual Returns

IEMG vs. IWP - Annual Returns

YearIEMGIWP
202018.18%35.29%
201917.5%35.14%
2018-14.69%-4.95%
201736.78%24.98%
20169.98%7.15%
2015-13.86%-0.39%
2014-2.04%11.68%
2013-2.16%35.44%
20120.0%15.62%
20110.0%-1.82%
20100.0%26.1%

IEMG had its best year in 2017 with an annual return of 36.78%. IEMG’s worst year over the past decade yielded -14.69% and occurred in 2018. In most years the iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF provided moderate returns such as in 2012, 2011, and 2010 where annual returns amounted to 0.0%, 0.0%, and 0.0% respectively.

The year 2013 was the strongest year for IWP, returning 35.44% on an annual basis. The poorest year for IWP in the last ten years was 2018, with a yield of -4.95%. Most years the iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF has given investors modest returns, such as in 2014, 2012, and 2017, when gains were 11.68%, 15.62%, and 24.98% respectively.

Portfolio Growth

IEMG vs. IWP - Portfolio Growth

FundInitial BalanceFinal BalanceCAGR
IEMG$10,000$15,0377.41%
IWP$10,000$25,88816.75%

A $10,000 investment in IEMG would have resulted in a final balance of $15,037. This is a profit of $5,037 over 7 years and amounts to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.41%.

With a $10,000 investment in IWP, the end total would have been $25,888. This equates to a $15,888 profit over 7 years and a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.75%.

IEMG’s CAGR is 9.34 percentage points lower than that of IWP and as a result, would have yielded $10,851 less on a $10,000 investment. Thus, IEMG performed worse than IWP by 9.34% annually.


Current recommendations:

Over the past years, I have discovered several tools and products that have helped me tremendously on my path to financial freedom:

P.S.: The links below are affiliate links, which means I receive a small commission at no extra cost to you when you sign up for one of the services. Thank you for your support!

1)Personal Capital is simply the best tool out there to track your net worth and plan for financial freedom. Just their retirement planner alone has become an invaluable tool to keep myself on track financially. Try it out, it's free!

2) Take a look at M1 Finance, my favorite broker. I love how easy it is to invest and maintain my portfolio with them. I can set up automatic transfers, rebalance my portfolio with one click and even borrow up to 35% of my assets at super low interest rates!

3) Fundrise is by far the best way I've found to invest in Real Estate. You can diversify your portfolio by investing in their eREITs or even allocate capital to individual properties (without the hassle of managing tenants!).

4) Groundfloor is another great way to get exposure to the real estate sector by investing in short-term, high-yield real estate debt. Current returns are >10% and you can get started with just $10.

5) If you are interested in startup investing, check out Mainvest. I've started allocating a small amount of assets to invest in and support small businesses. Return targets are between 10-25% and you can start with just $100!

To see all of my most up-to-date recommendations, check out the Recommended Tools section.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *