ETF Comparison

IWF vs IWD: Same Universe, Opposite Style Tilt

A head-to-head of iShares Russell 1000 Growth and Russell 1000 Value covering how each slice is built, cost, and what they already share.

Data updated September 18, 2026

Best for

IWDInvestors who want higher current income (1.48% vs 0.35% for IWF).
IWFInvestors 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.

IWD has outpaced IWF over the trailing twelve months, posting a 26.48% total return against 7.22%. The picture flips over 10 years, though — IWF has compounded at 17.92% a year, ahead of IWD at 11.58%. IWD has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 13.1% against 19.6% for IWF. 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.
Symbol	YTD	1Y	3Y	5Y	10Y	Since May 2000	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
IWD	19.88%	26.48%	19.08%	11.75%	11.58%	8.28%	13.1%	1.00	1.44	-15.7%
IWF	4.78%	7.22%	21.84%	12.15%	17.92%	8.36%	19.6%	0.78	1.12	-23.4%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of September 18, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; windows of one year or longer are annualized. “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.
Metric	IWD	IWF
Full name	iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF	iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Issuer	iShares	iShares
Underlying index	Russell 1000 Value Index	Russell 1000 Growth Index
Last Close	$251.70 as of September 18, 2026	$123.25 as of September 18, 2026
Distribution rate	1.48%	0.35%
Distribution Safety Score™	100	90
Safety-Adjusted Yield	1.48%	0.31%
Expense ratio	0.18%	0.18%
AUM	$81.9B	$123B
Distribution frequency	Quarterly	Quarterly
Objective	Provide 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 class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	05/22/2000	05/22/2000
Beta	0.78	1.21
Last dividend	$0.93 payable today	$0.1089 payable today
Ex-dividend date	09/15/2026	09/15/2026

Bottom lineChoose IWD if you want higher current income (1.48% vs 0.35% for IWF). Choose IWF if you want broad equity exposure.

IWD vs IWF: Russell 1000 value or growth?

Same large-cap universe, opposite style. Growth versus value is the decision, not a small yield gap.

	IWD	IWF
Index	Russell 1000 Value Index	Russell 1000 Growth Index
Expense ratio	0.18%	0.18%
Distribution rate	1.48%	0.35%

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

ETFs466

Total AUM$4551B

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

iShares is one of the largest ETF providers globally, known for offering a broad, diversified lineup of exchange-traded funds across multiple asset classes and investment strategies. The company operates 215 funds spanning 15 distinct families, including popular offerings in dividend income, covered call strategies, bonds, equities, ESG-focused investments, and factor-based approaches, with widely-held tickers like AGG (bond), ACWI (global equity), and AOA (allocation). iShares is characterized by its comprehensive fund ecosystem that serves both core portfolio holdings and specialized investment strategies, making it a prominent player for investors seeking both traditional and alternative income-generating ETF solutions.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on IWD and IWF.

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

IWD (iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF) and IWF (iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF) are both quarterly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

IWD offers the higher yield at 1.48% vs 0.35% for IWF. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

They have different reference exposures: IWD is linked to Russell 1000 Value Index while IWF is linked to Russell 1000 Growth Index, which means their performance drivers differ.

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

Still deciding? Track IWD & IWF for free

Create a free Dividend Vision account to keep them on a watchlist, get notified when they declare dividends, and see how much income they would add to your portfolio.

Add to my watchlist See what a free account includes

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, IWD would generate roughly $12.33/month, while IWF would produce $2.92/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay quarterly distributions.

IWD yield1.48%

IWF yield0.35%

Monthly diff on $10K$9.42

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, IWD would cost approximately $180 in fees vs $180 for IWF (simplified, not compounded). Both charge the same expense ratio.

IWD ER0.18%

IWF ER0.18%

Strategy & risk

IWD tracks Russell 1000 Value Index with an index approach, while IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index with an index approach. Beta is 0.78 for IWD and 1.21 for IWF, making IWD the less volatile of the two by this measure.

IWD beta0.78

IWF beta1.21

Fund details

IWD is managed by iShares (launched 05/22/2000) with $81.9B in assets. IWF is managed by iShares (launched 05/22/2000) with $123B in assets.

IWD AUM$81.9B

IWF AUM$123B

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between IWF and IWD?

Same Russell 1000 universe, opposite style. IWF (iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF) tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. IWD (iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF) tracks Russell 1000 Value Index. Cost is 0.18% versus 0.18%; distributions are 0.35% and 1.48% as of September 2026. Growth versus value is the decision, not a small yield gap.

What is the current distribution rate for IWD and IWF?

IWD currently distributes 1.48% and IWF 0.35%, based on fund data updated September 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is IWD or IWF better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. IWD 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.

Can I hold both IWD and IWF?

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 IWD or IWF safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — IWD scores 100, IWF scores 90, so IWD's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. IWD has also shown lower price volatility (beta 0.78 vs 1.21 for IWF). No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.

Which has lower fees, IWD or IWF?

IWD and IWF both charge the same expense ratio of 0.18%, so neither is cheaper on fees — pick based on yield, strategy, or underlying index instead.

How much income does $10,000 in IWD vs IWF generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in IWD would generate roughly $12.33 per month ($148.00 annually). The same in IWF would produce about $2.92 per month ($35.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, IWD or IWF?

More comparisons to explore

People also compare IWF with

Popular comparisons

IWD vs IWF — at a glance

Generated September 19, 2026.

The distinction matters because value and growth stocks behave differently across market cycles — value stocks tend to trade at lower multiples and generate more current income, while growth stocks emphasize capital appreciation and typically pay minimal dividends.

How they differ

The most striking difference is the distribution rate: IWD yields 1.48% while IWF yields 0.35%, a gap of roughly 1.13 percentage points. This reflects the underlying index composition — value stocks pay dividends more consistently, while growth stocks reinvest profits into business expansion rather than shareholder payouts. IWF's $123B in assets under management exceeds IWD's $81.9B, suggesting stronger investor appetite for growth exposure. On volatility, IWF carries a beta of 1.21 versus IWD's 0.78, meaning the growth fund amplifies market swings while the value fund cushions them. Both charge 0.18% in annual fees, so the cost difference is immaterial.

Who each is best for

IWD: Fits investors seeking a lower-volatility large-cap allocation who value current income and prefer stocks trading below historical valuations. Works well for those building a core portfolio position where near-term dividend cash flow matters.

IWF: Fits investors with a longer time horizon who prioritize growth over immediate yield and are comfortable with above-market volatility. Suits those allocating to large-cap tech and momentum-driven businesses where reinvested earnings drive total return.

Key risks to know

Style rotation risk. Value and growth alternate in outperformance across market cycles; a prolonged period favoring one style can leave the other lagging for months or years. The outcome depends on interest-rate moves, inflation, and sentiment shifts largely outside either fund's control.

Overlap with broad-market exposure. Both hold Russell 1000 constituents, so combining them or pairing either with a total U.S. stock fund creates significant overlap in holdings; verify your portfolio's sector and individual-stock concentration before adding both.

Market-cap concentration within each style. The Russell 1000 Growth Index may concentrate heavily in a handful of mega-cap technology names; the Russell 1000 Value Index does the same with financials and industrials. Neither fund offers granular protection against sector-level drawdowns within its style box.

Bottom line

If you want steady dividend income and lower volatility, IWD's 1.48% yield and 0.78 beta stand out; if you're building for long-term appreciation and can accept 1.21 beta, IWF's growth orientation aligns better with that goal. Both carry identical fees and inception history, so the choice hinges on whether your portfolio needs value or growth exposure and how much current income matters to your financial plan. Past performance doesn't 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.

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