BGRO vs IWF
iShares Large Cap Growth Active ETF vs iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Which is better, BGRO or IWF?
Nearly the same fund. IWF costs less.
IWF has a lower expense ratio. BGRO led over 1Y, IWF over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. BGRO is less concentrated, with 48.7% 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 | BGRO | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $10M | $129.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.34% |
| Holdings | 38 | 370 |
| YTD Return | +12.63%Best | +5.65% |
| 1Y Return | +13.39%Best | +7.28% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.37% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.59% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.4% | 15.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -24.9% | -23.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $14,149 | $14,392Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 48.7%Best | 57.4% |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jun 4, 2024 | May 22, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 5, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.4 years).
BGRO 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 2.4 years both funds cover.
BGRO vs IWF Performance
iShares Large Cap Growth Active ETF (BGRO) is an ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BGRO returned +13.39% while IWF returned +7.28%. Year to date, BGRO is up 12.63% versus a gain of 5.65% for IWF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BGRO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% compared with 15.9% for IWF. 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 -24.9% for BGRO and -23.4% 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 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BGRO charges 0.55% per year while IWF charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $18 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BGRO currently yields 0.00% against 0.34% for IWF.
Holdings Overlap
90.9% of BGRO's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 68.5% of IWF's money is in holdings BGRO also owns.
Most of BGRO is already inside IWF. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
35 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in BGRO and 372 in IWF, against full books of 38 and 370.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 267 positions for IWF that do not appear in our book for BGRO (31.0% of the fund), and 3 for BGRO that do not appear in IWF (5.2%).
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 BGRO | Weight in IWF | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 13.22% | 15.77% | 2.55% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.66% | 7.58% | 2.92% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.01% | 5.58% | 0.57% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 4.62% | 5.77% | 1.15% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 3.68% | 4.66% | 0.98% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.68% | 3.62% | 0.06% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.37% | 3.82% | 1.45% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.33% | 4.68% | 3.35% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.88% | 2.69% | 0.19% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.58% | 2.93% | 0.35% |
90.9% of BGRO 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, BGRO or IWF?
BGRO has an expense ratio of 0.55% while IWF charges 0.18%. IWF is the cheaper option, by $37 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BGRO or IWF?
Over the past year BGRO returned +13.39% vs +7.28% for IWF, so BGRO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), BGRO annualized +15.56% vs +16.38% for IWF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BGRO or IWF?
BGRO has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 15.9% for IWF. Worst drawdown: BGRO -24.9% vs IWF -23.4%.
Should I hold both BGRO and IWF?
BGRO and IWF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between BGRO and IWF?
90.9% of BGRO's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 68.5% of IWF's is in holdings BGRO also owns. They hold 35 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in BGRO and 372 in IWF.
Which pays a higher dividend, BGRO or IWF?
BGRO yields 0.00% while IWF yields 0.34%, so IWF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IWF better than BGRO?
IWF has a lower expense ratio. BGRO led over 1Y, IWF over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. BGRO is less concentrated, with 48.7% 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.