BASG vs IWF
Brown Advisory Sustainable Growth ETF vs iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Which is better, BASG or IWF?
Each has led over a different period.
IWF has a lower expense ratio. BASG led over 1Y, IWF over the full window. BASG is less concentrated, with 48.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.4%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BASG | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.61% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $527M | $129.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.34% |
| Holdings | 36 | 370 |
| YTD Return | +10.02%Best | +5.65% |
| 1Y Return | +8.00%Best | +7.28% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.37% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.59% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.4%Best | 16.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -19.3% | -16.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.3 years | $11,181 | $12,124Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 48.9%Best | 57.4% |
| Fund Family | Brown Advisory | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 13, 2025 | May 22, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 16, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.3 years).
BASG vs IWF growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.3 years both funds cover.
BASG vs IWF Performance
Brown Advisory Sustainable Growth ETF (BASG) is an ETF from Brown Advisory and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BASG returned +8.00% while IWF returned +7.28%. Year to date, BASG is up 10.02% versus a gain of 5.65% for IWF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.1% compared with 14.4% for BASG. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -19.3% for BASG and -16.3% for IWF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BASG charges 0.61% per year while IWF charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $61 vs $18 annually, a gap of $43 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BASG currently yields 0.00% against 0.34% for IWF.
Holdings Overlap
75.4% of BASG's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 38.7% of IWF's money is in holdings BASG also owns.
Most of BASG is already inside IWF. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
24 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in BASG and 372 in IWF, against full books of 36 and 370.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 277 positions for IWF that do not appear in our book for BASG (60.9% of the fund), and 5 for BASG that do not appear in IWF (12.2%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BASG | Weight in IWF | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.77% | 15.77% | 7.00% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.99% | 5.58% | 0.41% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.32% | 4.68% | 0.36% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 4.04% | 4.66% | 0.62% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 4.74% | 1.79% | 2.95% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 5.83% | 0.59% | 5.24% |
| MRVLMarvell Technology Inc | 3.83% | 0.68% | 3.15% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc. | 3.32% | 0.63% | 2.69% |
| MPWRMonolithic Power Systems Inc | 3.12% | 0.19% | 2.93% |
| ISRGIntuitive Surgical Inc. | 2.79% | 0.41% | 2.38% |
75.4% of BASG is already inside IWF.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BASG or IWF?
BASG has an expense ratio of 0.61% while IWF charges 0.18%. IWF is the cheaper option, by $43 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BASG or IWF?
Over the past year BASG returned +8.00% vs +7.28% for IWF, so BASG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), BASG annualized +8.97% vs +15.97% for IWF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BASG or IWF?
IWF has been the more volatile fund at 16.1% annualized versus 14.4% for BASG. Worst drawdown: BASG -19.3% vs IWF -16.3%.
Should I hold both BASG and IWF?
BASG and IWF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between BASG and IWF?
75.4% of BASG's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 38.7% of IWF's is in holdings BASG also owns. They hold 24 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in BASG and 372 in IWF.
Which pays a higher dividend, BASG or IWF?
BASG yields 0.00% while IWF yields 0.34%, so IWF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IWF better than BASG?
IWF has a lower expense ratio. BASG led over 1Y, IWF over the full window. BASG is less concentrated, with 48.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.