PlainIndex

ETF comparison

IWM vs MGK

US Small Cap vs US Large Cap Growth.

iShares Russell 2000 ETF · Vanguard Mega Cap Growth Index Fund

Holdings overlap

0.0 %

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

IWM only 0.0% Shared 0.0% MGK only 0.0%
In IWM only
0 positions
Shared
0 positions
In MGK only
0 positions

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

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

Side by side

IWM

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

iShares · US Small Cap

88 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.19%
Net assets
$76.88B
TTM yield
0.91%
Top-10 conc.
—
MGK

Vanguard Mega Cap Growth Index Fund

Vanguard · US Large Cap Growth

95 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.050%
Net assets
$32.03B
TTM yield
0.34%
Top-10 conc.
—

Sub-score comparison

81
Cost
95
87
Tax efficiency
89
100
Liquidity
100
N/A
Concentration
N/A
—
Tracking quality
—
IWM sub-score MGK

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

Cost difference

MGK is 14 bps cheaper than IWM. On a $100,000 position that's about $140/yr more in fees for IWM.

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 IWM

0 total

Every IWM position is also held by MGK.

Only in MGK

0 total

Every MGK position is also held by IWM.

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.