PlainIndex

ETF comparison

INTF vs IWF

Quality Factor vs US Large Cap Growth.

iShares International Equity Factor ETF · iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF

Holdings overlap

0.0 %

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

INTF only 0.0% Shared 0.0% IWF only 0.0%
In INTF only
0 positions
Shared
0 positions
In IWF only
0 positions

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

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

Side by side

INTF

iShares International Equity Factor ETF

iShares · Quality Factor

81 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.16%
Net assets
$3.42B
TTM yield
2.64%
Top-10 conc.
IWF

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF

iShares · US Large Cap Growth

89 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.18%
Net assets
$124.67B
TTM yield
0.35%
Top-10 conc.

Sub-score comparison

84
Cost
82
78
Tax efficiency
89
80
Liquidity
100
N/A
Concentration
N/A
Tracking quality
INTF sub-score IWF

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

Cost difference

INTF is 2 bps cheaper than IWF. On a $100,000 position that's about $20/yr more in fees for IWF.

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 INTF

0 total

Every INTF position is also held by IWF.

Only in IWF

0 total

Every IWF position is also held by INTF.

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.