IWFvsSCHG

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF or Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF, side by side from their own SEC filings. 67% of their stock holdings are the same at the same weight, across 123 stocks in both. SCHG costs 0.04% a year against 0.18% for IWF, $14 a year less on $10,000. Over the last twelve months IWF returned +17.5% and SCHG +27.9%.

67%of the two portfolios is the same stocks at the same weight
IWF74% in stocks the other holds too
SCHG88% in stocks the other holds too
stocks in bothstocks only in that fundbonds, cash and unmatched shares

The two funds

From each fund's latest N-PORT filing and its prospectus.

IWFSCHGYearly cost0.18%0.04%Net assets$128.9B$61.1BPositions371197Last 12 months+17.5%+27.9%3 years, a year+22.4%+26.6%5 years, a year+13.5%+15.9%Largest holdingNVDA 13.8%NVDA 11.0%Main sectorTechnology 54%Technology 47%Holdings as ofJun 30, 2026May 31, 2026

Returns are total returns with dividends reinvested, from the funds’ own monthly figures; “(price)” marks a fund whose filing record is younger than a year, whose twelve months are its price change. The stronger figure in each row is set in bold. Past returns say what happened, not what will.

Growth of $100

Both funds from September 2019, the first month both report, dividends reinvested.

IWF$334SCHG$347
September 2019May 2026

More comparisons

From each fund’s Form N-PORT (IWF: June 2026, SCHG: May 2026) and prospectus, via the SEC’s public data sets. Overlap counts only the stocks we can match to a listing: stock by stock, the smaller of the two weights, added up.