PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWF vs. VONG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWF vs. VONG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IWF having a 4.29% return and VONG slightly higher at 4.47%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWF having a 18.31% annualized return and VONG not far ahead at 18.43%.


IWF

1D
1.31%
1M
-1.09%
YTD
4.29%
6M
4.25%
1Y
21.82%
3Y*
22.46%
5Y*
14.10%
10Y*
18.31%

VONG

1D
1.34%
1M
-0.98%
YTD
4.47%
6M
4.37%
1Y
22.01%
3Y*
22.60%
5Y*
14.27%
10Y*
18.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWF vs. VONG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
4.29%18.33%33.12%42.59%-29.31%27.43%38.25%35.86%-1.67%29.95%
VONG
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF
4.47%18.45%33.20%42.67%-29.18%27.60%38.30%36.06%-1.53%30.05%

Correlation

The correlation between IWF and VONG is 1.00 - 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

1.00

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

1.00

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.00

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.00

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2010

0.98

The correlation between IWF and VONG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWF vs. VONG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWF
VONG

Technology

53.9%
51.4%

Consumer Cyclical

12.7%
13.2%

Communication Services

12.4%
13.2%

Healthcare

6.9%
7.1%

Industrials

5.4%
5.7%

Financial Services

5.0%
5.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
2.7%

Real Estate

0.4%
0.4%

Energy

0.3%
0.4%

Basic Materials

0.3%
0.3%

Utilities

0.3%
0.3%

Technology

IWF
53.9%
VONG
51.4%

Consumer Cyclical

IWF
12.7%
VONG
13.2%

Communication Services

IWF
12.4%
VONG
13.2%

Healthcare

IWF
6.9%
VONG
7.1%

Industrials

IWF
5.4%
VONG
5.7%

Financial Services

IWF
5.0%
VONG
5.3%

Consumer Defensive

IWF
2.4%
VONG
2.7%

Real Estate

IWF
0.4%
VONG
0.4%

Energy

IWF
0.3%
VONG
0.4%

Basic Materials

IWF
0.3%
VONG
0.3%

Utilities

IWF
0.3%
VONG
0.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

IWF vs. VONG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

VONG
VONG Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
VONG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VONG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
VONG Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
VONG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
VONG Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IWF vs. VONG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG). 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.


IWFVONGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.24

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.35

1.36

-0.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.41

4.47

-0.06

IWF vs. VONG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is comparable to the VONG Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWF and VONG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IWF vs. VONG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWF drawdown since its inception was -64.25%, which is greater than VONG's maximum drawdown of -32.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWF and VONG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFVONGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.25%

-32.72%

-31.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.27%

-16.23%

-0.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.36%

-23.27%

-0.09%

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

-4.25%

-4.14%

-0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.05%

-4.88%

-17.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.96%

4.94%

+0.02%

Volatility

IWF vs. VONG - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) have volatilities of 5.94% and 5.88%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFVONGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.94%

5.88%

+0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.68%

12.61%

+0.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.13%

16.04%

+0.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.50%

21.43%

+0.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.03%

20.93%

+0.10%

IWF vs. VONG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWF has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than VONG's 0.06% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IWF vs. VONG - Dividend Comparison

IWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, less than VONG's 0.56% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.35%0.36%0.46%0.67%0.91%0.49%0.66%0.99%1.27%1.10%1.43%1.37%
VONG
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.56%0.45%0.55%0.71%0.98%0.58%0.77%1.03%1.18%1.19%1.48%1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 1.00, IWF and VONG 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.

IWF has higher volatility (5.94%) compared to VONG (5.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWF dropped -64.25% vs VONG's -32.72%.

On 10-year performance, VONG leads with 18.43% vs 18.31% for IWF. On fees, VONG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VONG has performed better with a 18.43% return vs 18.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VONG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IWF.

VONG has the higher dividend yield at 0.56%, compared with 0.35% for IWF.

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IWF and 0.06% for VONG.

VONG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWF and VONG

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer