IVW vs. IWF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IVW (iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF) and IWF (iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds from iShares - IVW tracks the S&P 500 Growth Index while IWF tracks the Russell 1000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IVW returned 17.93%/yr vs 18.27%/yr for IWF. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.18% expense ratio.

Performance

IVW vs. IWF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IVW achieves a 8.67% return, which is significantly higher than IWF's 1.43% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IVW having a 17.93% annualized return and IWF not far ahead at 18.27%.

IVW

• 1D: -2.32%
• 1M: -2.04%
• YTD: 8.67%
• 6M: 7.44%
• 1Y: 26.74%
• 3Y*: 25.36%
• 5Y*: 13.97%
• 10Y*: 17.93%

IWF

• 1D: -1.60%
• 1M: -4.07%
• YTD: 1.43%
• 6M: 0.16%
• 1Y: 17.87%
• 3Y*: 21.78%
• 5Y*: 12.94%
• 10Y*: 18.27%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IVW vs. IWF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	8.67%	21.95%	35.82%	29.83%	-29.50%	31.80%	33.19%	30.77%	-0.21%	27.21%
IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF	1.43%	18.33%	33.12%	42.59%	-29.31%	27.43%	38.25%	35.86%	-1.67%	29.95%

Correlation

The correlation between IVW and IWF is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.99
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.99
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2000	0.97

The correlation between IVW and IWF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

IVW vs. IWF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IVW	IWF
Technology	53.0%	53.9%
Communication Services	15.8%	12.4%
Financial Services	8.6%	5.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	12.7%
Healthcare	5.7%	6.9%
Industrials	5.3%	5.4%
Utilities	1.2%	0.3%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	2.4%
Real Estate	0.5%	0.4%
Basic Materials	0.3%	0.3%
Energy	0.1%	0.3%

Return for Risk

IVW vs. IWF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IVW

IVW Risk / Return Rank: 45
IVW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
IVW Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Omega Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
IVW Martin Ratio Rank: 48

IWF

IWF Risk / Return Rank: 28
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 30
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 27

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

IVW vs. IWF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	IVW	IWF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	1.11	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	1.57	+0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.20	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.95	1.10	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.75	3.59	+4.16

IVW vs. IWF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IVW Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is higher than the IWF Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IVW and IWF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IVW vs. IWF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IVW drawdown since its inception was -57.33%, smaller than the maximum IWF drawdown of -64.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IVW and IWF.

Drawdown Indicators

	IVW	IWF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.33%	-64.25%	+6.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.75%	-16.27%	+2.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.15%	-23.36%	+1.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.72%	-32.72%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.72%	-32.72%	0.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.48%	-6.88%	+1.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.59%	-22.05%	+4.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	4.99%	-1.53%

Volatility

IVW vs. IWF - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) has a higher volatility of 7.23% compared to iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) at 6.08%. This indicates that IVW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IVW	IWF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.23%	6.08%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.82%	12.65%	+1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.06%	16.24%	+0.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.35%	21.52%	-0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.70%	21.01%	-0.31%

IVW vs. IWF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IVW and IWF have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IVW vs. IWF - Dividend Comparison

IVW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, more than IWF's 0.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	0.37%	0.40%	0.43%	1.03%	0.92%	0.46%	0.82%	1.63%	1.28%	1.30%	1.51%	1.51%
IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF	0.36%	0.36%	0.46%	0.67%	0.91%	0.49%	0.66%	0.99%	1.27%	1.10%	1.43%	1.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IVW and IWF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, IVW and IWF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IVW or IWF?

IVW has higher volatility (7.23%) compared to IWF (6.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IVW dropped -57.33% vs IWF's -64.25%.

Which ETF is better, IVW or IWF?

On 10-year performance, IWF leads with 18.27% vs 17.93% for IVW. Both ETFs have the same 0.18% expense ratio. On volatility, IWF has been the lower-risk option at 6.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IVW or IWF?

Over the 10-year period, IWF has performed better with a 18.27% return vs 17.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IVW or IWF?

IVW and IWF have the same expense ratio: 0.18% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IVW or IWF?

IVW has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.36% for IWF.

What is the main difference between IVW and IWF?

IVW tracks S&P 500 Growth Index, while IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IVW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.58 vs 1.11), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.