IJK vs IVOG
iShares S&P Mid-Cap 400 Growth ETF vs Vanguard S&P Mid-Cap 400 Growth ETF
Which is better, IJK or IVOG?
Nearly the same fund. IVOG costs less.
IVOG has a lower expense ratio. IVOG led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 1.00. IVOG is less concentrated, with 14.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 14.9%.
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 | IJK | IVOG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.16% | 0.10%Best |
| AUM | $10.6B | $1.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.58% | 0.57% |
| Holdings | 504 | 248 |
| YTD Return | +11.10% | +11.35%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.54% | +14.67%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.53% | +15.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.73% | +6.77%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6%Tie | 16.6%Tie |
| Max Drawdown | -39.3%Tie | -39.3%Tie |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,849 | $13,875Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 14.9% | 14.4%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 24, 2000 | Sep 7, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 9, 2010 to Oct 14, 2026 (16.1 years).
IJK vs IVOG 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 16.1 years both funds cover.
IJK vs IVOG Performance
iShares S&P Mid-Cap 400 Growth ETF (IJK) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard S&P Mid-Cap 400 Growth ETF (IVOG) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IJK returned +14.54% while IVOG returned +14.67%. Year to date, IJK is up 11.10% versus a gain of 11.35% for IVOG.
Over three years, IJK compounded at +15.53% per year against +15.63% for IVOG; over five years the annualized figures are +6.73% and +6.77% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVOG has the edge at +11.93% annualized vs +11.16%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IJK and IVOG have been equally volatile, both at 16.6% annualized.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -39.3% for IJK and -39.3% for IVOG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 1.00. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IJK charges 0.16% per year while IVOG charges 0.10%. On a $10,000 position that is $16 vs $10 annually, a gap of $6 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IJK currently yields 0.58% against 0.57% for IVOG.
Holdings Overlap
97.7% of IJK's money is in holdings IVOG also owns. 96.8% of IVOG's money is in holdings IJK also owns.
Most of IJK is already inside IVOG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
241 positions in common, counted across the 248 positions we hold weights for in IJK and 247 in IVOG, against full books of 504 and 248.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 6 positions for IVOG that do not appear in our book for IJK (3.1% of the fund), and 5 for IJK that do not appear in IVOG (1.9%).
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 IJK | Weight in IVOG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TWLOTwilio Inc. Class A | 2.57% | 1.94% | 0.63% |
| OKTAOkta Inc (okta) | 1.96% | 1.57% | 0.39% |
| 0RMV:LNTechnipfmc Plc Ordinary Shares | 1.50% | 1.69% | 0.19% |
| ATIAti Inc | 1.45% | 1.51% | 0.06% |
| NVT:IENvent Electric Plc Ordinary Shares | 1.49% | 1.32% | 0.17% |
| UTHRUnited Therapeutics Corp | 1.36% | 1.17% | 0.19% |
| XPOXpo Logistics Inc. | 1.17% | 1.23% | 0.06% |
| THCTenet Healthcare Corp Common Stock Usd 0.05 | 1.14% | 1.24% | 0.10% |
| CWCurtiss-wright Corp | 1.12% | 1.16% | 0.04% |
| RGLDRoyal Gold Inc | 1.09% | 1.15% | 0.06% |
97.7% of IJK is already inside IVOG.
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, IJK or IVOG?
IJK has an expense ratio of 0.16% while IVOG charges 0.10%. IVOG is the cheaper option, by $6 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IJK or IVOG?
Over the past year IJK returned +14.54% vs +14.67% for IVOG, so IVOG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IJK annualized +11.16% vs +11.93% for IVOG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IJK or IVOG?
IJK and IVOG have been equally volatile, both at 16.6% annualized. Worst drawdown: IJK -39.3% vs IVOG -39.3%.
Should I hold both IJK and IVOG?
IJK and IVOG have a monthly-return correlation of 1.00, 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 IJK and IVOG?
97.7% of IJK's money is in holdings IVOG also owns. 96.8% of IVOG's is in holdings IJK also owns. They hold 241 positions in common, counted across the 248 positions we hold weights for in IJK and 247 in IVOG.
Which pays a higher dividend, IJK or IVOG?
IJK yields 0.58% while IVOG yields 0.57%, so IJK currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVOG better than IJK?
IVOG has a lower expense ratio. IVOG led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 1.00. IVOG is less concentrated, with 14.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 14.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.