ILCG vs IWO: Grades, Fees and Holdings Compared

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF

ILCGANYSE Arca

iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF

IWOBNYSE Arca

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

ILCG −0.20pt a year

ILCG0.04%IWO0.24%

Avg volume · 30D

IWO 6.6×the volume

ILCG69.6KIWO459K

10Y return · a year

ILCG +6.7pt

ILCG+16.9%IWO+10.2%

ILCG vs IWO Performance

Nov 9, 2021 – Nov 9, 2026

+53.4%ILCG+13.4%IWO

Expense ratio: ILCG 0.04%, better; IWO 0.24%
Fund size: ILCG $2.86B; IWO $13.7B
1Y total return: ILCG +4.3%; IWO +11.8%, better
Yield (12M): ILCG 0.44%; IWO 0.47%, better
Holdings: ILCG 328; IWO 1118
Avg volume (30D): ILCG 69.6K sh; IWO 459K sh, better
NAV per share: ILCG $104.77; IWO $343.90
52W range

ETF.net Grade

Pillar letters and Scores for ILCG, IWO, with each pillar’s weight
Pillar	ILCG	IWO
Cost30% weight	A96Higher	D37
Mission25% weight	A100Higher	A86
Risk15% weight	C42Higher	D38
Tradability15% weight	B63	B68Higher
Holdings10% weight	C52	A82Higher
Durability5% weight	B66	A71Higher

Rank among US Growth Index funds

How we build Categories ›

Same Category. ILCG and IWO are both graded against the same 35 US Growth Index funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

US Growth Index⁠

Category · 35 funds

See all 35 ›

ILCG ranks 4th and IWO 16th of 35 funds in the US Growth Index Category.

Rank 1ASPYGState Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETFScore 84
Rank 2AIMCGiShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETFScore 78
Rank 2ASCHGSchwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETFScore 78
Rank 4AILCGiShares Morningstar Growth ETFScore 77
Rank 4AVUGVanguard Morningstar Growth ETFScore 77
Rank 16BGGUSGoldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETFScore 60
Rank 16BIWOiShares Russell 2000 Growth ETFScore 60
Rank 16BIWPiShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETFScore 60

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

ILCGAiShares Morningstar Growth ETF

IWOBiShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF

In short

ILCG Growth by Morningstar's rulebook. A 2004-vintage iShares fund that screens large and mid caps for above-average earnings, sales, cash-flow and book-value growth, and charges four basis points to do it.

IWO No data

Stated mandate

ILCG The fund aims to follow an index of U.S. large- and mid-cap stocks chosen for above-average earnings, sales, cash-flow, and book-value growth.

IWO No data

Why people hold it

ILCG 0.04% a year. The typical fund in its factor peer group charges roughly eight times that, so almost none of the return leaks out the fee door.
Uses Morningstar's growth definition (earnings, sales, cash flow, book value) rather than S&P's or Russell's, and reaches into mid caps, not just the S&P 500.ishares.com
Trading since 2004, a multi-billion-dollar fund holding roughly 300 stocks. Long-running plumbing, not a launch-week experiment.
Tracking has been tight, and the fund sits in the upper half of its factor cohort overall, with cost doing much of the heavy lifting.

IWO No data

Worth knowing

ILCG Pure growth means no value ballast, and the ride has been bumpier than most funds in its factor group. The style can sit out of favor for long stretches.
Concentration runs high for the cohort: cap-weighted growth screens funnel a big share of the fund into the same handful of mega-cap names.
Moderately traded, not a tape leader. Sibling IUSG applies S&P's growth definition at the same 0.04%, so the pick is which index rulebook you prefer.

IWO No data

Full ILCG profile⁠

Full IWO profile⁠

ILCG vs IWO Holdings

How ILCG and IWO differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

Level by level

Holdings0 in both0.0%
Sector11 Sectors59.3%
Countryby domicile99.0%
Asset classStocks100%

Sector

Sector weights in ILCG and IWO, widest gap first
Sector	Gap	ILCG	IWO
Technology	ILCG +32.6 points	50.7%	18.1%
Health Care	IWO +23.2 points	6.9%	30.1%
Communication	ILCG +6.8 points	9.3%	2.5%
Industrials	IWO +5.4 points	9.8%	15.2%
Financials	IWO +4.5 points	6.0%	10.5%
Energy	IWO +4.2 points	0.7%	4.9%
Materials	IWO +2.6 points	1.5%	4.1%
Real Estate	IWO +0.8 points	1.7%	2.5%
Utilities	ILCG +0.6 points	0.9%	0.3%
Consumer Discretionary	ILCG +0.5 points	10.5%	10.0%
Consumer Staples	ILCG +0.1 points	2.0%	1.9%

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in ILCG and IWO, widest gap first
Country	More in ILCGMore in IWO	Gap	ILCG	IWO
United States		ILCG +0.7 points	99.5%	98.8%
Other countries (12)		IWO +0.7 points	0.5%	1.2%

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

ILCG50.0%
IWO6.6%

Securities held

ILCG325
IWO1,115

Asset class

ILCG: Stocks
IWO: Stocks

Holdings

Only in ILCG325
In both0
Only in IWO1,115

Only in ILCG

325 securities, 99.9% of ILCG by weight

NVIDIA14.75%
Apple8.47%
Amazon.com Inc4.77%
Broadcom Inc4.65%
Eli Lilly3.67%
Microsoft3.29%
Alphabet Class A3.22%
Alphabet Class C2.61%
Advanced Micro Devices2.48%
Tesla Inc2.12%
Meta Platforms Class A1.66%
Micron Technology1.45%
Visa Class A1.22%
Palantir Technologies Class A1.21%
Ge Aerospace1.14%
Mastercard Class A1.01%
Netflix0.90%
Applied Material Inc0.90%
Intel Corporation0.89%
Palo Alto Networks0.87%
Lam Research0.85%
Walmart0.74%
Crowdstrike Holdings Class A0.73%
Ge Vernova0.70%
Costco Wholesale Corp0.69%
Amphenol Corp Class A0.62%
Kla0.61%
Welltower0.60%
Arista Networks0.60%
Intuitive Surgical0.54%
Caterpillar Inc0.48%
Boeing0.46%
Marvell Technology0.42%
Texas Instrument0.39%
Applovin Class A0.36%
Servicenow0.36%
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC0.35%
Oracle0.32%
Analog Devices0.32%
Western Digital Corp0.32%
Snowflake0.32%
Cadence Design Systems0.30%
Cloudflare Class A0.29%
Freeport Mcmoran Inc0.29%
Motorola Solutions Inc0.29%
Corning0.29%
Johnson Controls International PLC0.28%
Royal Caribbean Group0.28%
Howmet Aerospace0.28%
Hilton Worldwide Holdings0.28%

Only in IWO

1,115 securities, 99.8% of IWO by weight

Glaukos0.89%
Brightspring Health Services Inc0.78%
Jfrog0.76%
Moog Inc Class A0.64%
Brinker International Inc0.62%
Ryman Hospitality Properties Reit0.62%
Healthequity0.60%
Tg Therapeutics0.60%
Protagonist Therapeutics0.56%
Twist Bioscience0.55%
Spyre Therapeutics Inc0.55%
Victoria’s Secret0.55%
Krystal Biotech0.54%
Firstcash Holdings Inc0.52%
Interdigital Inc0.52%
Oscar Health Class A0.51%
Silicon Laboratories0.51%
Zeta Global Holdings Class A0.49%
Praxis Precision Medicines0.48%
Frontdoor Inc0.48%
10X Genomics Class A0.48%
Federal Signal Corp0.48%
Qualys0.47%
Kymera Therapeutics0.47%
Abercrombie and Fitch Class A0.46%
Commvault Systems0.46%
Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp0.45%
Lantheus Holdings0.45%
Rhythm Pharmaceuticals0.45%
Compass Inc Class A0.44%
Casella Waste Systems Class A0.43%
Aci Worldwide0.43%
Ligand Pharmaceuticals0.43%
Alkermes0.42%
Esco Technologies0.42%
Vaxcyte0.41%
Xometry Class A0.41%
Stonex Group Inc0.41%
Magnolia Oil Gas Corp Class A0.39%
Hims Hers Health Class A0.39%
Cg Oncology0.39%
Varonis Systems0.39%
Radnet0.38%
Balchem0.37%
Clear Secure Class A0.37%
Cogent Biosciences0.36%
Installed Building Products0.36%
Enpro0.36%
Plexus Corp0.36%
Haemonetics Corp0.36%

Weight gaps

ILCG and IWO share no securities.

All 325 ILCG holdings⁠All 1,118 IWO holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

ILCG vs IWO Cost

Overpaying IWO vs ILCG

$4,110

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

ILCG 0.04%
$849
IWO 0.24%
$4,959

Amount$10,000

Years30 years

Cost over time

ILCG 0.04%
IWO 0.24%
Overpaying

Year by year

Year	ILCG	IWO	Overpaying
10	$73	$437	$364
20	$288	$1,699	$1,411
30	$849	$4,959	$4,110

Expense ratio

0.04%ILCG, cheaper
0.24%IWO

ILCG0.04%IWO0.24%

0.03%0.70%

Middle half of US Growth Index funds
Median 0.18%

ILCG 2nd cheapest of 35 funds

IWO 23rd cheapest of 35 funds

ILCG vs IWO Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 9, 2026

Yield (12M): ILCG 0.44%; IWO 0.47%, better
Payout (12M): ILCG $0.48; IWO $1.69
Last payment: ILCG $0.14; IWO $0.41
Ex-dividend: ILCG Sep 15, 2026; IWO Sep 15, 2026
Paid on: ILCG Sep 18, 2026; IWO Sep 18, 2026
Frequency: ILCG Quarterly; IWO Quarterly

Distribution history

Per share, 2017 to 2026, same scale for both

ILCGQuarterly · 40 paymentsAll ILCG payments⁠

IWOQuarterly · 39 paymentsAll IWO payments⁠

ILCG vs IWO Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

ILCG
IWO

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years: ILCG 17.8%, betterIWO 20.6%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years: ILCG 1.06, betterIWO 0.78
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years: ILCG −35.4%, betterIWO −40.2%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years: ILCG 1.23IWO 1.43; Market = 1

ILCG and IWO in the news

All news⁠

Best ETFs
The best growth ETF is the cheap one on the index you want
Updated Nov 2, 2026ILCG

Popular comparisons

ILCGAvsSPYGA
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF · State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF
Expense ratio
0.04% · 0.04%
Category
IWOBvsSPYGA
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF · State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF
Expense ratio
0.24% · 0.04%
Category
ILCGAvsIMCGA
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF · iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF
Expense ratio
0.04% · 0.06%
Category
IWOBvsIMCGA
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF · iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF
Expense ratio
0.24% · 0.06%
Category
ILCGAvsSCHGA
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF · Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Expense ratio
0.04% · 0.04%
Category
IWOBvsSCHGA
iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF · Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Expense ratio
0.24% · 0.04%
Category

ILCG vs IWO

In short

Stated mandate

Why people hold it

Worth knowing

How ILCG and IWO differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in ILCG

Only in IWO

Weight gaps

Cost over time

Year by year

Distribution history

Fall from peak · 5 years

Risk facts

The best growth ETF is the cheap one on the index you want

How ILCG and IWO differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in ILCG

Only in IWO

Weight gaps