IJT vs RZG
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF vs Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 Pure Growth ETF
Which is better, IJT or RZG?
Nearly the same fund. IJT costs less.
IJT has a lower expense ratio. IJT led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, RZG over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. IJT is less concentrated, with 9.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 18.2%.
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 | IJT | RZG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.35% |
| AUM | $7.6B | $120M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.78% | 0.58% |
| Holdings | 770 | 263 |
| YTD Return | +12.16% | +12.80%Best |
| 1Y Return | +13.75%Best | +13.51% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.62% | +16.29%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +4.63%Best | +3.52% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.3%Best | 21.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -58.0%Best | -58.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,540Best | $11,888 |
| Top 10 Weight | 9.8%Best | 18.2% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Growth | Small Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 24, 2000 | Mar 1, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 7, 2006 to Oct 14, 2026 (20.6 years).
IJT vs RZG 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 20.6 years both funds cover.
IJT vs RZG Performance
iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Growth ETF (IJT) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 Pure Growth ETF (RZG) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IJT returned +13.75% while RZG returned +13.51%. Year to date, IJT is up 12.16% versus a gain of 12.80% for RZG.
Over three years, IJT compounded at +14.62% per year against +16.29% for RZG; over five years the annualized figures are +4.63% and +3.52% respectively. Across the full 21-year window we track, IJT has the edge at +8.65% annualized vs +8.19%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RZG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.6% compared with 19.3% for IJT. 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 -58.0% for IJT and -58.8% for RZG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.98. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IJT charges 0.18% per year while RZG charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $35 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IJT currently yields 0.78% against 0.58% for RZG.
Holdings Overlap
51.0% of IJT's money is in holdings RZG also owns. 96.7% of RZG's money is in holdings IJT also owns.
Most of RZG is already inside IJT. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
124 positions in common, counted across the 349 positions we hold weights for in IJT and 127 in RZG, against full books of 770 and 263.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 2 positions for RZG that do not appear in our book for IJT (2.2% of the fund), and 220 for IJT that do not appear in RZG (48.0%).
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 IJT | Weight in RZG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ACMRAcm Research Inc | 0.59% | 2.72% | 2.13% |
| PTGXProtagonist Therapeutics Inc | 1.09% | 1.98% | 0.89% |
| VSATViasat Inc | 1.17% | 1.20% | 0.03% |
| SNEXStonex Group Inc | 0.86% | 1.51% | 0.65% |
| FORMFormfactor, Inc. | 1.40% | 0.92% | 0.48% |
| AAMIAcadian Asset Management Inc | 0.33% | 1.98% | 1.65% |
| CHEFChef Holdings, Inc. | 0.50% | 1.79% | 1.29% |
| DAVEDave Inc Common Stock Usd.0001 | 0.41% | 1.88% | 1.47% |
| TGTXTg Therapeutics Inc Common Stock | 0.92% | 1.31% | 0.39% |
| POWLPowell Industries Inc | 0.66% | 1.53% | 0.87% |
96.7% of RZG is already inside IJT.
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, IJT or RZG?
IJT has an expense ratio of 0.18% while RZG charges 0.35%. IJT is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IJT or RZG?
Over the past year IJT returned +13.75% vs +13.51% for RZG, so IJT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (21 years), IJT annualized +8.65% vs +8.19% for RZG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IJT or RZG?
RZG has been the more volatile fund at 21.6% annualized versus 19.3% for IJT. Worst drawdown: IJT -58.0% vs RZG -58.8%.
Should I hold both IJT and RZG?
IJT and RZG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.98, 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 IJT and RZG?
96.7% of RZG's money is in holdings IJT also owns. 96.7% of RZG's is in holdings IJT also owns. They hold 124 positions in common, counted across the 349 positions we hold weights for in IJT and 127 in RZG.
Which pays a higher dividend, IJT or RZG?
IJT yields 0.78% while RZG yields 0.58%, so IJT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RZG better than IJT?
IJT has a lower expense ratio. IJT led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, RZG over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. IJT is less concentrated, with 9.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 18.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.