IWB vs. IWP: What’s The Difference?

The iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and the iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) are both among the Top 100 ETFs. IWB is a iShares Large Blend fund and IWP is a iShares Mid-Cap Growth fund. So, what’s the difference between IWB and IWP? And which fund is better?

The expense ratio of IWB is 0.09 percentage points lower than IWP’s (0.15% vs. 0.24%). IWB also has a lower exposure to the technology sector and a lower standard deviation. Overall, IWB has provided lower returns than IWP over the past ten years.

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

Summary

IWB IWP
Name iShares Russell 1000 ETF iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
Category Large Blend Mid-Cap Growth
Issuer iShares iShares
AUM 30.54B 15.7B
Avg. Return 14.64% 16.75%
Div. Yield 1.14% 0.26%
Expense Ratio 0.15% 0.24%

The iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) is a Large Blend fund that is issued by iShares. It currently has 30.54B total assets under management and has yielded an average annual return of 14.64% over the past 10 years. The fund has a dividend yield of 1.14% with an expense ratio of 0.15%.

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%.

IWB’s dividend yield is 0.88% higher than that of IWP (1.14% vs. 0.26%). Also, IWB yielded on average 2.11% less per year over the past decade (14.64% vs. 16.75%). The expense ratio of IWB is 0.09 percentage points lower than IWP’s (0.15% vs. 0.24%).

Fund Composition

Industry Exposure

IWB vs. IWP - Industry Exposure

IWB IWP
Technology 25.33% 33.88%
Industrials 8.88% 14.09%
Energy 2.44% 1.51%
Communication Services 10.83% 6.32%
Utilities 2.36% 0.16%
Healthcare 13.35% 16.79%
Consumer Defensive 5.97% 2.32%
Real Estate 3.34% 2.46%
Financial Services 13.64% 4.52%
Consumer Cyclical 11.85% 16.09%
Basic Materials 2.02% 1.86%

The iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) has the most exposure to the Technology sector at 25.33%. This is followed by Financial Services and Healthcare at 13.64% and 13.35% respectively. Utilities (2.36%), Energy (2.44%), and Real Estate (3.34%) only make up 8.14% of the fund’s total assets.

IWB’s mid-section with moderate exposure is comprised of Consumer Defensive, Industrials, Communication Services, Consumer Cyclical, and Healthcare stocks at 5.97%, 8.88%, 10.83%, 11.85%, and 13.35%.

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%.

IWB is 8.55% less exposed to the Technology sector than IWP (25.33% vs 33.88%). IWB’s exposure to Financial Services and Healthcare stocks is 9.12% higher and 3.44% lower respectively (13.64% vs. 4.52% and 13.35% vs. 16.79%). In total, Utilities, Energy, and Real Estate also make up 4.01% more of the fund’s holdings compared to IWP (8.14% vs. 4.13%).

Holdings

IWB - Holdings

IWB Holdings Weight
Apple Inc 5.45%
Microsoft Corp 5.11%
Amazon.com Inc 3.43%
Facebook Inc Class A 2.03%
Alphabet Inc Class A 1.93%
Alphabet Inc Class C 1.82%
Tesla Inc 1.27%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B 1.24%
NVIDIA Corp 1.11%
JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.09%

IWB’s Top Holdings are Apple Inc, Microsoft Corp, Amazon.com Inc, Facebook Inc Class A, and Alphabet Inc Class A at 5.45%, 5.11%, 3.43%, 2.03%, and 1.93%.

Alphabet Inc Class C (1.82%), Tesla Inc (1.27%), and Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B (1.24%) have a slightly smaller but still significant weight. NVIDIA Corp and JPMorgan Chase & Co are also represented in the IWB’s holdings at 1.11% and 1.09%.

IWP - Holdings

IWP Holdings Weight
IDEXX Laboratories Inc 1.3%
DocuSign Inc 1.3%
Roku Inc Class A 1.29%
Match Group Inc 1.06%
Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc 1.06%
Pinterest Inc 1.05%
Veeva Systems Inc Class A 1.04%
Palantir Technologies Inc Ordinary Shares – Class A 1.04%
Lululemon Athletica Inc 1.01%
DexCom Inc 1.0%

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%.

Risk Analysis

IWB IWP
Mean Return 1.27 1.27
R-squared 99.73 87.01
Std. Deviation 13.87 16.05
Alpha -0.38 -1.03
Beta 1.02 1.1
Sharpe Ratio 1.05 0.91
Treynor Ratio 14.31 12.98

The iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) has a Mean Return of 1.27 with a Sharpe Ratio of 1.05 and a Beta of 1.02. Its Standard Deviation is 13.87 while IWB’s Treynor Ratio is 14.31. Furthermore, the fund has a Alpha of -0.38 and a R-squared of 99.73.

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

IWB’s Mean Return is 0.00 points lower than that of IWP and its R-squared is 12.72 points higher. With a Standard Deviation of 13.87, IWB is slightly less volatile than IWP. The Alpha and Beta of IWB are 0.65 points higher and 0.08 points lower than IWP’s Alpha and Beta.

Performance

Annual Returns

IWB vs. IWP - Annual Returns

Year IWB IWP
2020 20.8% 35.29%
2019 31.26% 35.14%
2018 -4.91% -4.95%
2017 21.53% 24.98%
2016 11.91% 7.15%
2015 0.82% -0.39%
2014 13.08% 11.68%
2013 32.93% 35.44%
2012 16.27% 15.62%
2011 1.36% -1.82%
2010 15.94% 26.1%

IWB had its best year in 2013 with an annual return of 32.93%. IWB’s worst year over the past decade yielded -4.91% and occurred in 2018. In most years the iShares Russell 1000 ETF provided moderate returns such as in 2014, 2010, and 2012 where annual returns amounted to 13.08%, 15.94%, and 16.27% 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

IWB vs. IWP - Portfolio Growth

Fund Initial Balance Final Balance CAGR
IWB $10,000 $42,462 14.64%
IWP $10,000 $50,191 16.75%

A $10,000 investment in IWB would have resulted in a final balance of $42,462. This is a profit of $32,462 over 11 years and amounts to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.64%.

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%.

IWB’s CAGR is 2.11 percentage points lower than that of IWP and as a result, would have yielded $7,729 less on a $10,000 investment. Thus, IWB performed worse than IWP by 2.11% 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) 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!

2) 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!).

3) If you are interested in crypto, check out Gemini. I've started allocating a small amount of assets to the growing crypto space and Gemini has just been a breeze to use. Once you register, make sure to also open an Active Trader account to buy crypto at the lowest fees on the market (just 0.03%!).

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

Leave a Reply