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

Performance

IWF vs. VOO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWF achieves a -0.58% return, which is significantly lower than VOO's 9.38% return. Over the past 10 years, IWF has outperformed VOO with an annualized return of 17.12%, while VOO has yielded a comparatively lower 14.99% annualized return.


IWF

1D
2.96%
1M
-5.43%
6M
0.24%
YTD
-0.58%
1Y
7.10%
3Y*
18.75%
5Y*
11.51%
10Y*
17.12%
ALL TIME*
8.19%

VOO

1D
1.66%
1M
-0.73%
6M
7.47%
YTD
9.38%
1Y
18.28%
3Y*
19.01%
5Y*
12.67%
10Y*
14.99%
ALL TIME*
14.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$612.04M$598.78M$645.39M
$3.66B$3.81B$5.44B

IWF vs. VOO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
-0.58%18.33%33.12%42.59%-29.31%27.43%38.25%35.86%-1.67%29.95%
VOO
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
9.38%17.82%24.98%26.32%-18.17%28.79%18.32%31.37%-4.50%21.77%

Correlation

The correlation between IWF and VOO is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.92

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.93

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.95

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 9, 2010

0.95

The correlation between IWF and VOO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWF vs. VOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWF
VOO

Technology

54.2%
38.6%

Communication Services

16.2%
9.9%

Industrials

9.0%
8.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
9.5%

Healthcare

5.4%
8.9%

Financial Services

4.3%
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.2%
4.5%

Energy

0.5%
3.0%

Real Estate

0.4%
1.8%

Utilities

0.3%
2.2%

Basic Materials

0.3%
1.7%

Technology

IWF
54.2%
VOO
38.6%

Communication Services

IWF
16.2%
VOO
9.9%

Industrials

IWF
9.0%
VOO
8.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IWF
8.3%
VOO
9.5%

Healthcare

IWF
5.4%
VOO
8.9%

Financial Services

IWF
4.3%
VOO
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWF
1.2%
VOO
4.5%

Energy

IWF
0.5%
VOO
3.0%

Real Estate

IWF
0.4%
VOO
1.8%

Utilities

IWF
0.3%
VOO
2.2%

Basic Materials

IWF
0.3%
VOO
1.7%

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. VOO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

VOO
VOO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
VOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
VOO Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
VOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
VOO Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IWF vs. VOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). 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.


IWFVOODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.26

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.44

2.06

-1.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.31

8.81

-7.50

IWF vs. VOO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWF Sharpe Ratio is 0.41, which is lower than the VOO Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWF and VOO, 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. VOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWF drawdown since its inception was -64.25%, which is greater than VOO's maximum drawdown of -33.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWF and VOO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFVOODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.25%

-33.99%

-30.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.27%

-8.90%

-7.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.36%

-18.69%

-4.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.72%

-24.52%

-8.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.72%

-33.99%

+1.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.73%

-2.07%

-6.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.98%

-3.67%

-18.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.43%

2.08%

+3.35%

Volatility

IWF vs. VOO - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) has a higher volatility of 6.46% compared to Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) at 3.47%. This indicates that IWF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFVOODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.46%

3.47%

+2.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.05%

10.08%

+3.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.48%

12.81%

+4.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.71%

16.94%

+4.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.10%

18.01%

+3.09%

IWF vs. VOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWF has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than VOO's 0.03% 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. VOO - Dividend Comparison

IWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than VOO's 1.08% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.37%0.36%0.46%0.67%0.91%0.49%0.66%0.99%1.27%1.10%1.43%1.37%
VOO
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
1.08%1.13%1.24%1.46%1.69%1.25%1.54%1.88%2.06%1.78%2.02%2.10%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, IWF and VOO 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 (6.46%) compared to VOO (3.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWF dropped -64.25% vs VOO's -33.99%.

On 10-year performance, IWF leads with 17.12% vs 14.99% for VOO. On fees, VOO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VOO has been the lower-risk option at 3.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWF has performed better with a 17.12% return vs 14.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VOO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IWF.

VOO has the higher dividend yield at 1.08%, compared with 0.37% for IWF.

IWF is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while VOO is S&P 500. IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index, while VOO tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IWF and 0.03% for VOO.

VOO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.41), 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 VOO

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