CARK vs IWF
CastleArk Large Growth ETF vs iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Which is better, CARK or IWF?
Nearly the same fund. IWF costs less.
IWF has a lower expense ratio. CARK led over 1Y, IWF over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. IWF is less concentrated, with 57.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 63.4%.
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 | CARK | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.54% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $351M | $129.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.01% | 0.34% |
| Holdings | 60 | 370 |
| YTD Return | +9.30%Best | +5.65% |
| 1Y Return | +11.27%Best | +7.28% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.37% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.59% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.5% | 15.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -25.2% | -23.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $16,010 | $17,385Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 63.4% | 57.4%Best |
| Fund Family | CastleArk Management LLC | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 6, 2023 | May 22, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 7, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.9 years).
CARK 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 2.9 years both funds cover.
CARK vs IWF Performance
CastleArk Large Growth ETF (CARK) is an ETF from CastleArk Management LLC and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CARK returned +11.27% while IWF returned +7.28%. Year to date, CARK is up 9.30% versus a gain of 5.65% for IWF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CARK has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.5% compared with 15.7% 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 -25.2% for CARK 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 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CARK charges 0.54% per year while IWF charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $54 vs $18 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CARK currently yields 0.01% against 0.34% for IWF.
Holdings Overlap
94.3% of CARK's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 58.5% of IWF's money is in holdings CARK also owns.
Most of CARK is already inside IWF. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
26 positions in common, counted across the 29 positions we hold weights for in CARK and 372 in IWF, against full books of 60 and 370.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 276 positions for IWF that do not appear in our book for CARK (41.1% of the fund), and 2 for CARK that do not appear in IWF (4.5%).
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 CARK | Weight in IWF | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 14.36% | 15.77% | 1.41% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 9.33% | 5.77% | 3.56% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.30% | 7.58% | 1.28% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.68% | 5.58% | 0.90% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.24% | 4.68% | 0.44% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 5.21% | 2.69% | 2.52% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.48% | 3.82% | 0.34% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 4.17% | 2.93% | 1.24% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 5.43% | 1.24% | 4.19% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 4.45% | 1.79% | 2.66% |
94.3% of CARK 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, CARK or IWF?
CARK has an expense ratio of 0.54% while IWF charges 0.18%. IWF is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CARK or IWF?
Over the past year CARK returned +11.27% vs +7.28% for IWF, so CARK leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CARK or IWF?
CARK has been the more volatile fund at 16.5% annualized versus 15.7% for IWF. Worst drawdown: CARK -25.2% vs IWF -23.4%.
Should I hold both CARK and IWF?
CARK and IWF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, 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 CARK and IWF?
94.3% of CARK's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 58.5% of IWF's is in holdings CARK also owns. They hold 26 positions in common, counted across the 29 positions we hold weights for in CARK and 372 in IWF.
Which pays a higher dividend, CARK or IWF?
CARK yields 0.01% while IWF yields 0.34%, so IWF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IWF better than CARK?
IWF has a lower expense ratio. CARK led over 1Y, IWF over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. IWF is less concentrated, with 57.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 63.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.