Skip to content

ITOT vs. IWP: What’s The Difference?

The iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (ITOT) and the iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) are both among the Top 100 ETFs. ITOT is a iShares Large Blend fund and IWP is a iShares Mid-Cap Growth fund. So, what’s the difference between ITOT and IWP? And which fund is better?

The expense ratio of ITOT is 0.21 percentage points lower than IWP’s (0.03% vs. 0.24%). ITOT also has a lower exposure to the technology sector and a lower standard deviation. Overall, ITOT has provided lower returns than IWP over the past ten years.

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

ITOTIWP
NameiShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETFiShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
CategoryLarge BlendMid-Cap Growth
IssueriSharesiShares
AUM41.97B15.7B
Avg. Return14.59%16.75%
Div. Yield1.2%0.26%
Expense Ratio0.03%0.24%

The iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (ITOT) is a Large Blend fund that is issued by iShares. It currently has 41.97B total assets under management and has yielded an average annual return of 14.59% over the past 10 years. The fund has a dividend yield of 1.2% with an expense ratio of 0.03%.

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%.

ITOT’s dividend yield is 0.94% higher than that of IWP (1.2% vs. 0.26%). Also, ITOT yielded on average 2.16% less per year over the past decade (14.59% vs. 16.75%). The expense ratio of ITOT is 0.21 percentage points lower than IWP’s (0.03% 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

ITOT vs. IWP - Industry Exposure

ITOTIWP
Technology24.49%33.88%
Industrials9.21%14.09%
Energy2.51%1.51%
Communication Services10.54%6.32%
Utilities2.35%0.16%
Healthcare13.59%16.79%
Consumer Defensive5.79%2.32%
Real Estate3.67%2.46%
Financial Services13.69%4.52%
Consumer Cyclical11.69%16.09%
Basic Materials2.47%1.86%

The iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (ITOT) has the most exposure to the Technology sector at 24.49%. This is followed by Financial Services and Healthcare at 13.69% and 13.59% respectively. Basic Materials (2.47%), Energy (2.51%), and Real Estate (3.67%) only make up 8.65% of the fund’s total assets.

ITOT’s mid-section with moderate exposure is comprised of Consumer Defensive, Industrials, Communication Services, Consumer Cyclical, and Healthcare stocks at 5.79%, 9.21%, 10.54%, 11.69%, and 13.59%.

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%.

ITOT is 9.39% less exposed to the Technology sector than IWP (24.49% vs 33.88%). ITOT’s exposure to Financial Services and Healthcare stocks is 9.17% higher and 3.20% lower respectively (13.69% vs. 4.52% and 13.59% vs. 16.79%). In total, Basic Materials, Energy, and Real Estate also make up 2.82% more of the fund’s holdings compared to IWP (8.65% vs. 5.83%).

Holdings

ITOT - Holdings

ITOT HoldingsWeight
Apple Inc5.07%
Microsoft Corp4.75%
Amazon.com Inc3.16%
Facebook Inc Class A1.89%
Alphabet Inc Class A1.79%
Alphabet Inc Class C1.71%
Tesla Inc1.17%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B1.17%
NVIDIA Corp1.08%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.02%

ITOT’s Top Holdings are Apple Inc, Microsoft Corp, Amazon.com Inc, Facebook Inc Class A, and Alphabet Inc Class A at 5.07%, 4.75%, 3.16%, 1.89%, and 1.79%.

Alphabet Inc Class C (1.71%), Tesla Inc (1.17%), and Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B (1.17%) have a slightly smaller but still significant weight. NVIDIA Corp and JPMorgan Chase & Co are also represented in the ITOT’s holdings at 1.08% and 1.02%.

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

ITOTIWP
Mean Return1.271.27
R-squared99.487.01
Std. Deviation14.0216.05
Alpha-0.54-1.03
Beta1.031.1
Sharpe Ratio1.040.91
Treynor Ratio14.1312.98

The iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (ITOT) has a Alpha of -0.54 with a Treynor Ratio of 14.13 and a Beta of 1.03. Its R-squared is 99.4 while ITOT’s Standard Deviation is 14.02. Furthermore, the fund has a Sharpe Ratio of 1.04 and a Mean Return of 1.27.

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

ITOT’s Mean Return is 0.00 points lower than that of IWP and its R-squared is 12.39 points higher. With a Standard Deviation of 14.02, ITOT is slightly less volatile than IWP. The Alpha and Beta of ITOT are 0.49 points higher and 0.07 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

ITOT vs. IWP - Annual Returns

YearITOTIWP
202020.75%35.29%
201930.87%35.14%
2018-5.27%-4.95%
201721.23%24.98%
201612.59%7.15%
20150.96%-0.39%
201413.01%11.68%
201332.67%35.44%
201215.98%15.62%
20111.55%-1.82%
201016.15%26.1%

ITOT had its best year in 2013 with an annual return of 32.67%. ITOT’s worst year over the past decade yielded -5.27% and occurred in 2018. In most years the iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF provided moderate returns such as in 2014, 2012, and 2010 where annual returns amounted to 13.01%, 15.98%, and 16.15% 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

ITOT vs. IWP - Portfolio Growth

FundInitial BalanceFinal BalanceCAGR
ITOT$10,000$42,31014.59%
IWP$10,000$50,19116.75%

A $10,000 investment in ITOT would have resulted in a final balance of $42,310. This is a profit of $32,310 over 11 years and amounts to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.59%.

With a $10,000 investment in IWP, the end total would have been $50,191. This equates to a $40,191 profit over 11 years and a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.75%.

ITOT’s CAGR is 2.16 percentage points lower than that of IWP and as a result, would have yielded $7,881 less on a $10,000 investment. Thus, ITOT performed worse than IWP by 2.16% 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.