IWB vs MSLC
iShares Russell 1000 ETF vs Morgan Stanley Pathway Large Cap Equity ETF
Which is better, IWB or MSLC?
Nearly the same fund. IWB costs less.
IWB has a lower expense ratio. IWB led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. MSLC is less concentrated, with 35.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.0%.
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 | IWB | MSLC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15%Best | 0.39% |
| AUM | $49.5B | $4.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.92% | 1.95% |
| Holdings | 1,023 | 793 |
| YTD Return | +12.91%Best | +10.97% |
| 1Y Return | +16.56%Best | +14.08% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.96% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.34% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.3% | 11.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -19.1% | -17.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $12,770Best | $12,375 |
| Top 10 Weight | 36.0% | 35.6%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Morgan Stanley |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 9, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 9, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
IWB vs MSLC 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 1.8 years both funds cover.
IWB vs MSLC Performance
iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Morgan Stanley Pathway Large Cap Equity ETF (MSLC) is an ETF from Morgan Stanley. Over the past year IWB returned +16.56% while MSLC returned +14.08%. Year to date, IWB is up 12.91% versus a gain of 10.97% for MSLC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.3% compared with 11.9% for MSLC. 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 -19.1% for IWB and -17.9% for MSLC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IWB charges 0.15% per year while MSLC charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $39 annually, a gap of $24 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IWB currently yields 0.92% against 1.95% for MSLC.
Holdings Overlap
93.9% of IWB's money is in holdings MSLC also owns. 94.9% of MSLC's money is in holdings IWB also owns.
Most of MSLC is already inside IWB. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
739 positions in common, counted across the 1,024 positions we hold weights for in IWB and 789 in MSLC, against full books of 1,023 and 793.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 17 positions for MSLC that do not appear in our book for IWB (2.7% of the fund), and 196 for IWB that do not appear in MSLC (5.5%).
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 IWB | Weight in MSLC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.63% | 7.04% | 0.59% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.77% | 5.80% | 0.97% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.40% | 5.55% | 0.15% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.41% | 4.07% | 0.66% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 2.79% | 3.23% | 0.44% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.26% | 2.49% | 0.23% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.26% | 2.31% | 0.05% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.26% | 1.95% | 0.31% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.75% | 1.60% | 0.15% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 1.26% | 1.61% | 0.35% |
94.9% of MSLC is already inside IWB.
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, IWB or MSLC?
IWB has an expense ratio of 0.15% while MSLC charges 0.39%. IWB is the cheaper option, by $24 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IWB or MSLC?
Over the past year IWB returned +16.56% vs +14.08% for MSLC, so IWB leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IWB annualized +14.55% vs +12.57% for MSLC. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IWB or MSLC?
IWB has been the more volatile fund at 12.3% annualized versus 11.9% for MSLC. Worst drawdown: IWB -19.1% vs MSLC -17.9%.
Should I hold both IWB and MSLC?
IWB and MSLC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, 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 IWB and MSLC?
94.9% of MSLC's money is in holdings IWB also owns. 94.9% of MSLC's is in holdings IWB also owns. They hold 739 positions in common, counted across the 1,024 positions we hold weights for in IWB and 789 in MSLC.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWB or MSLC?
IWB yields 0.92% while MSLC yields 1.95%, so MSLC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MSLC better than IWB?
IWB has a lower expense ratio. IWB led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. MSLC is less concentrated, with 35.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.