PlainIndex

ETF comparison

IJH vs IJK

Both US Mid Cap.

iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF · iShares S&P Mid-Cap 400 Growth ETF

Holdings overlap

0.0 %

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

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

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

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

Side by side

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.
—
IJK

iShares S&P Mid-Cap 400 Growth ETF

iShares · US Mid Cap

89 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.17%
Net assets
$10.56B
TTM yield
0.57%
Top-10 conc.
—

Sub-score comparison

95
Cost
83
86
Tax efficiency
88
100
Liquidity
100
N/A
Concentration
N/A
—
Tracking quality
—
IJH sub-score IJK

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

Cost difference

IJH is 12 bps cheaper than IJK. On a $100,000 position that's about $120/yr more in fees for IJK.

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 IJH

0 total

Every IJH position is also held by IJK.

Only in IJK

0 total

Every IJK position is also held by IJH.

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.