DV
Dividend Vision

ETF Comparison

IJH vs IWM: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF and iShares Russell 2000 ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Updated October 8, 2026

How these figures are calculated: methodology.

Best for

  • IJHInvestors who want broad equity exposure.
  • IWMInvestors who want broad equity exposure.

Jump to the side-by-side numbers

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.

IJH has lagged IWM over the trailing twelve months, posting a 13.02% total return against 14.21%. The picture flips over 10 years, though — IJH has compounded at 10.69% a year, ahead of IWM at 9.79%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Total return and risk statistics by fund. Each row is one fund; each column is one period or statistic.
SymbolYTD cumulative1Y cumulative3Y annualized5Y annualized10Y annualizedSince May 2000Volatility Sharpe Sortino Max drawdown
IJH10.61%13.02%15.69%8.02%10.69%9.67%17.8%0.570.83-24.1%
IWM12.88%14.21%18.34%6.01%9.79%8.49%21.0%0.590.86-27.5%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of October 9, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since May 2000” measures every fund from May 26, 2000 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Side-by-side snapshot

Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric; each column is one fund.
MetricIJHIWM
Full nameiShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETFiShares Russell 2000 ETF
IssueriSharesiShares
Underlying indexS&P MidCap 400 IndexRussell 2000 Index
Last Close$73.03 as of October 8, 2026$277.57 as of October 8, 2026
Distribution rate1.24%1.08%
Trailing 12-month yield1.24%0.98%
Distribution Safety Score™ 9594
Safety-Adjusted Yield 1.18%1.02%
Expense ratio0.05%0.19%
AUM$123B$79.0B
Distribution frequencyQuarterlyQuarterly
ObjectiveProvide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials.Provide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials.
Asset classEquityEquity
Inception date05/22/200005/22/2000
Beta1.01.27
Last dividend$0.226$0.75
Ex-dividend date09/15/202609/15/2026

Bottom lineIJH and IWM are both for investors who want broad equity exposure — so strategy isn't the deciding factor here. Cost is: IJH charges 0.05% against 0.19% for IWM, and between two funds this similar that gap comes straight out of your return every year you hold.

Model this comparison:
Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

iShares
ETFs467
Total AUM$4679B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

iShares, operated by BlackRock, is one of the largest and most established ETF providers globally, known for offering broad, liquid index-tracking funds across nearly all asset classes and investment styles. The lineup encompasses a comprehensive range of strategies including core equity and bond exposure, dividend and income-focused funds, covered call strategies, ESG and thematic investments, factor-based approaches, alternatives, commodities, and municipal bonds, serving both individual and institutional investors. With numerous popular ticker symbols and extensive diversification across geographies, sectors, and investment objectives, iShares provides one of the market's widest selections of ETFs for building diversified portfolios.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on IJH and IWM.

See all iShares ETFs

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — free to start, no credit card.

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Quick verdict

IJH (iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both quarterly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

IJH offers the higher yield at 1.24% vs 1.08% for IWM. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

IJH is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.05% compared to 0.19%.

They have different reference exposures: IJH is linked to S&P MidCap 400 Index while IWM is linked to Russell 2000 Index, which means their performance drivers differ.

IJH is the larger fund by assets ($123B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, IJH would generate roughly $31.00 cash per distribution, while IWM would produce $27.00 cash per distribution, at current distribution rates. Both pay quarterly distributions.

IJH yield1.24%
IWM yield1.08%
Cash diff on $10K$4.00

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, IJH would cost approximately $50 in fees vs $190 for IWM (simplified, not compounded). The $140.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

IJH ER0.05%
IWM ER0.19%

Strategy & risk

IJH tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index with an index approach, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index with a small caps approach. Beta is 1.0 for IJH and 1.27 for IWM, making IJH the less volatile of the two by this measure.

IJH beta1.0
IWM beta1.27

Fund details

IJH is managed by iShares (launched 05/22/2000) with $123B in assets. IWM is managed by iShares (launched 05/22/2000) with $79.0B in assets.

IJH AUM$123B
IWM AUM$79.0B
Ready to act?
Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Enjoyed this page?

Do us a favor — if you found this comparison useful, please share it with a friend researching dividend ETFs.

Frequently asked questions

What is the current distribution rate for IJH and IWM?

IJH currently distributes 1.24% and IWM 1.08%, based on fund data updated October 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is IJH or IWM better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. IJH currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

What is the difference between IJH and IWM?

IJH (iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF) tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index with an index approach, while IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) tracks Russell 2000 Index with a small caps approach. They are issued by iShares and iShares respectively.

Can I hold both IJH and IWM?

Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.

Is IJH or IWM safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — they are effectively tied: IJH scores 95, IWM scores 94. Neither has a clear safety edge on that measure. IJH has also shown lower price volatility (beta 1.00 vs 1.27 for IWM). No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.

Which has lower fees, IJH or IWM?

IJH has an expense ratio of 0.05% while IWM charges 0.19%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in IJH vs IWM generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in IJH would generate roughly $31.00 cash per distribution ($124.00 annually). The same in IWM would produce about $27.00 cash per distribution ($108.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, IJH or IWM?

IJH has lagged IWM over the trailing twelve months, posting a 13.02% total return against 14.21%. The picture flips over 10 years, though — IJH has compounded at 10.69% a year, ahead of IWM at 9.79%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

More comparisons to explore

IJH vs IWM — at a glance

Generated October 3, 2026.

Overview

IJH and IWM are both broad index-tracking ETFs launched on the same day, but they expose you to different slices of the U.S. equity market. The choice between them hinges on whether you want mid-cap stability or small-cap growth potential, and how much fee drag matters to your returns.

How they differ

The most fundamental difference is market capitalization: IJH holds mid-caps, IWM holds smaller companies, so their price moves and earnings drivers will diverge noticeably in different economic cycles. IWM carries a meaningfully higher beta of 1.24 versus IJH's 0.99, meaning it amplifies broad market moves by roughly a quarter more—a sign that smaller companies are more volatile.

Who each is best for

IJH: Fits investors seeking stable exposure to established mid-sized companies with lower volatility and minimal fee leakage, or those building a diversified U.S. equity core where mid-cap is a deliberate sleeve.

IWM: Designed for investors comfortable with meaningfully higher price swings and seeking to capture small-cap returns, or those building a barbell strategy that pairs large-cap core holdings with high-beta small-cap upside.

Key risks to know

  • Mid-cap versus small-cap cyclicality. Mid-caps (IJH) tend to outperform in stable, moderate-growth environments; small-caps (IWM) often lag in recessions and periods of rising rates when liquidity tightens. The choice between them embeds a bet on the economic regime.
  • Small-cap liquidity and volatility premium. IWM's 1.27 beta reflects not just company size but also lower trading volume and wider bid-ask spreads in constituent stocks. This can amplify losses during market stress and inflate trading costs if you rebalance frequently.
  • Expense ratio compounding. Over a 20-year horizon, IWM's 0.19% ratio versus IJH's 0.05% erodes roughly 3% of cumulative wealth before taxes, assuming identical gross returns. This drag is material for long-term buy-and-hold holders.

Bottom line

If you value cost efficiency and lower volatility, IJH's 0.05% fee and 0.99 beta make it the cheaper, steadier play for a core U.S. equity position. If you're willing to tolerate IWM's 1.27 beta and 0.19% expense ratio in pursuit of small-cap growth exposure or to tilt toward higher-risk companies, IWM's larger asset base and established market presence offer that exposure. Past performance of either index does not predict future results.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.

Learn the method

The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.

How to read a fund's stats How expense ratios eat returns Correlation between two funds

Still deciding? Compare them against your own portfolio

See how each ETF fits alongside your real holdings — forecast future income, analyze overlap, and gauge risk. Start a free 7-day Dividend Vision trial and make the call with your full portfolio in view.

Start Free Open in Comparator Browse Screener

These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.