When considering investment options, you might want to look at two ETFs: the iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO +0.80%) and the iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV +0.75%). This choice really boils down to evaluating the high growth potential of smaller companies against the more stable, though possibly less exciting, performance of the largest 500 firms in America.
Many investors typically lean on IVV as a cornerstone of their portfolios. But, you know, IWO might catch the eye of those who are looking for more aggressive growth opportunities in smaller firms. So, how do they stack up against each other on some key factors?
Snapshots (cost and size)
| metric | IWO | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Publisher | iShares | iShares |
| Expense ratio | 0.24% | 0.03% |
| 1 year return (as of May 14, 2026) | 35.95% | 27.97% |
| Dividend yield | 0.42% | 1.12% |
| Beta (monthly for 5 years) | 1.46 | 1.00 |
| Assets under management (AUM) | $13.9 billion | $797.5 billion |
Beta indicates volatility compared to the S&P 500, based on five years of monthly returns. The one-year return is the projected total return for the next 12 months, while the dividend yield reflects the trailing 12-month distribution yield.
Looking at these figures, it’s clear that IVV’s expense ratio is significantly lower, at just 0.03% compared to IWO’s 0.24%. This translates to a fee of $3 annually for every $10,000 invested in IVV, versus $24 for IWO. Additionally, IVV features a higher dividend yield, which is definitely appealing for anyone seeking some passive income.
Comparing performance and risk
| metric | IWO | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum drawdown (5 years) | -42.02% | -24.52% |
| $1,000 growth in 5 years (total return) | $1,353 | $1,944 |
What’s inside
IVV is predominantly invested in large-cap U.S. stocks, holding just over 500 different stocks. Technology represents roughly 36% of its assets, with financial services and communications services following. Major holdings include Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft. The dividend payout over the last year was $8.06 per share, and it lacks any distinct features.
On the flip side, IWO is all about smaller growth companies, boasting over 1,000 holdings. Its top sectors are industrials, technology, and healthcare, each accounting for around 23% of its investments. Prominent holdings here include Bloom Energy, Credo Technology Group, and Sterling Infrastructure. Over the past year, it paid a dividend of $1.51 per share and, like IVV, it doesn’t highlight any special characteristics.
What this means for investors
The primary distinction between these two ETFs lies in their market focus. IWO targets small-cap stocks, while IVV is centered solely on large-cap stocks.
Typically, small-cap stocks can be more volatile in the short term, yet they also hold the promise of higher returns. IWO is particularly geared toward small-cap growth, which tends to bring both increased volatility and potentially enhanced returns over time.
If we talk about risk, IWO’s beta value is high, and it has experienced a significant maximum drawdown, indicating more substantial price swings over the past five years. Although its 12-month total return looks better than that of IVV, the latter has shown superior performance over the five-year period, perhaps thanks to the enormous gains among tech companies.
Meanwhile, IVV offers more stability and provides investors access to the 500 largest U.S. companies. With low expense ratios and solid dividend yields, it allows for some passive income while minimizing fees.
So, while IVV’s S&P 500 exposure might appeal to those seeking steady, reliable growth in large firms, IWO might be the better pick for those looking to invest in smaller companies that could see rapid growth in the longer run.
