The iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and the iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) are both among the Top 100 ETFs. IWF is a iShares Large Growth fund and IWB is a iShares Large Blend fund. So, what’s the difference between IWF and IWB? And which fund is better?
The expense ratio of IWF is 0.04 percentage points higher than IWB’s (0.19% vs. 0.15%). IWF also has a higher exposure to the technology sector and a higher standard deviation. Overall, IWF has provided higher returns than IWB over the past ten years.
In this article, we’ll compare IWF vs. IWB. We’ll look at holdings and industry exposure, as well as at their performance and risk metrics. Moreover, I’ll also discuss IWF’s and IWB’s annual returns, portfolio growth, and fund composition and examine how these affect their overall returns.
|Name||iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF||iShares Russell 1000 ETF|
|Category||Large Growth||Large Blend|
The iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is a Large Growth fund that is issued by iShares. It currently has 72.16B total assets under management and has yielded an average annual return of 17.72% over the past 10 years. The fund has a dividend yield of 0.52% with an expense ratio of 0.19%.
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%.
IWF’s dividend yield is 0.62% lower than that of IWB (0.52% vs. 1.14%). Also, IWF yielded on average 3.09% more per year over the past decade (17.72% vs. 14.64%). The expense ratio of IWF is 0.04 percentage points higher than IWB’s (0.19% vs. 0.15%).
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).
The iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) has the most exposure to the Technology sector at 39.29%. This is followed by Consumer Cyclical and Communication Services at 17.62% and 12.82% respectively. Energy (0.28%), Basic Materials (1.01%), and Real Estate (1.85%) only make up 3.14% of the fund’s total assets.
IWF’s mid-section with moderate exposure is comprised of Consumer Defensive, Industrials, Financial Services, Healthcare, and Communication Services stocks at 4.31%, 6.19%, 7.36%, 9.23%, and 12.82%.
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%.
IWF is 13.96% more exposed to the Technology sector than IWB (39.29% vs 25.33%). IWF’s exposure to Consumer Cyclical and Communication Services stocks is 5.77% higher and 1.99% higher respectively (17.62% vs. 11.85% and 12.82% vs. 10.83%). In total, Energy, Basic Materials, and Real Estate also make up 4.66% less of the fund’s holdings compared to IWB (3.14% vs. 7.80%).
|Facebook Inc Class A||3.91%|
|Alphabet Inc Class A||3.2%|
|Alphabet Inc Class C||3.03%|
|Visa Inc Class A||1.91%|
|The Home Depot Inc||1.62%|
IWF’s Top Holdings are Apple Inc, Microsoft Corp, Amazon.com Inc, Facebook Inc Class A, and Alphabet Inc Class A at 10.51%, 9.85%, 6.63%, 3.91%, and 3.2%.
Alphabet Inc Class C (3.03%), Tesla Inc (2.45%), and NVIDIA Corp (2.14%) have a slightly smaller but still significant weight. Visa Inc Class A and The Home Depot Inc are also represented in the IWF’s holdings at 1.91% and 1.62%.
|Facebook Inc Class A||2.03%|
|Alphabet Inc Class A||1.93%|
|Alphabet Inc Class C||1.82%|
|Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B||1.24%|
|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%.
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).
The iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) has a Mean Return of 1.48 with a R-squared of 92.93 and a Standard Deviation of 14.42. Its Treynor Ratio is 17.1 while IWF’s Sharpe Ratio is 1.19. Furthermore, the fund has a Alpha of 2.16 and a Beta of 1.03.
The iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) has a Treynor Ratio of 14.31 with a Sharpe Ratio of 1.05 and a Alpha of -0.38. Its Mean Return is 1.27 while IWB’s Beta is 1.02. Furthermore, the fund has a Standard Deviation of 13.87 and a R-squared of 99.73.
IWF’s Mean Return is 0.21 points higher than that of IWB and its R-squared is 6.80 points lower. With a Standard Deviation of 14.42, IWF is slightly more volatile than IWB. The Alpha and Beta of IWF are 2.54 points higher and 0.01 points higher than IWB’s Alpha and Beta.
BTW: Uncorrelated crypto assets such as Bitcoin can serve as a hedge and mitigate risk. I've allocated around 5% of my portfolio to crypto assets through Coinbase - the simplest and cheapest broker I've found! Click here to read more (link to Coinbase).
IWF had its best year in 2020 with an annual return of 38.21%. IWF’s worst year over the past decade yielded -1.68% and occurred in 2018. In most years the iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF provided moderate returns such as in 2014, 2012, and 2010 where annual returns amounted to 12.84%, 15.03%, and 16.47% respectively.
The year 2013 was the strongest year for IWB, returning 32.93% on an annual basis. The poorest year for IWB in the last ten years was 2018, with a yield of -4.91%. Most years the iShares Russell 1000 ETF has given investors modest returns, such as in 2014, 2010, and 2012, when gains were 13.08%, 15.94%, and 16.27% respectively.
|Fund||Initial Balance||Final Balance||CAGR|
A $10,000 investment in IWF would have resulted in a final balance of $55,920. This is a profit of $45,920 over 11 years and amounts to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17.72%.
With a $10,000 investment in IWB, the end total would have been $42,462. This equates to a $32,462 profit over 11 years and a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.64%.
IWF’s CAGR is 3.09 percentage points higher than that of IWB and as a result, would have yielded $13,458 more on a $10,000 investment. Thus, IWF outperformed IWB by 3.09% annually.
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 Coinbase. I've started allocating a small amount of assets to the growing crypto space and Coinbase has just been a breeze to use. Once you register, make sure to also open an Coinbase Pro account to buy crypto at the lowest fees on the market (just 0.1%!).
To see all of my most up-to-date recommendations, check out the Recommended Tools section.