PlainIndex

ETF comparison

IJT vs IWN

Both US Small Cap.

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF · iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF

Holdings overlap

0.0 %

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

IJT only 0.0% Shared 0.0% IWN only 0.0%
In IJT only
0 positions
Shared
0 positions
In IWN only
0 positions

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

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

Side by side

IJT

iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF

iShares · US Small Cap

87 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.18%
Net assets
$7.32B
TTM yield
0.77%
Top-10 conc.
—
IWN

iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF

iShares · US Small Cap

85 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.24%
Net assets
$13.43B
TTM yield
1.49%
Top-10 conc.
—

Sub-score comparison

82
Cost
76
88
Tax efficiency
85
94
Liquidity
100
N/A
Concentration
N/A
—
Tracking quality
—
IJT sub-score IWN

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

Cost difference

IJT is 6 bps cheaper than IWN. On a $100,000 position that's about $60/yr more in fees for IWN.

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 IJT

0 total

Every IJT position is also held by IWN.

Only in IWN

0 total

Every IWN position is also held by IJT.

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.