PlainIndex

ETF comparison

ACWV vs IJH

Quality Factor vs US Mid Cap.

iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF · iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF

Holdings overlap

0.0 %

0 positions appear in both funds. Buying equal dollars of ACWV and IJH would leave roughly 0.0% of each dollar exposed to the same underlying securities.

ACWV only 0.0% Shared 0.0% IJH only 0.0%
In ACWV only
0 positions
Shared
0 positions
In IJH only
0 positions

Holdings data for ACWV covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.

Holdings data for IJH covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.

Side by side

ACWV

iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF

iShares · Quality Factor

80 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.20%
Net assets
$3.25B
TTM yield
2.05%
Top-10 conc.
—
IJH

iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF

iShares · US Mid Cap

94 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.050%
Net assets
$115.69B
TTM yield
1.22%
Top-10 conc.
—

Sub-score comparison

80
Cost
95
80
Tax efficiency
86
79
Liquidity
100
N/A
Concentration
N/A
—
Tracking quality
—
ACWV sub-score IJH

Tracking-quality sub-score is not yet computed for any fund — see methodology for which inputs are live.

Cost difference

IJH is 15 bps cheaper than ACWV. On a $100,000 position that's about $150/yr more in fees for ACWV.

Fee figure is the annual expense charged on $100,000. It compounds over time — we publish a fuller cost-projection calculator on the methodology page.

Top shared holdings

0 shared in total

No shared holdings between these funds.

Only in ACWV

0 total

Every ACWV position is also held by IJH.

Only in IJH

0 total

Every IJH position is also held by ACWV.

Holdings overlap is the sum of min(weight_a, weight_b) over positions matched on ISIN (CUSIP fallback). Methodology: see /methodology/.

Comparing two funds doesn't endorse swapping one for the other. Tax-lot history, account type, and personal goals matter — PlainIndex publishes data and methodology, not investment advice.