IWD vs REVS
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF vs Columbia Research Enhanced Value ETF
Which is better, IWD or REVS?
Nearly the same fund. IWD costs less.
IWD has a lower expense ratio. IWD led over 1Y and 3Y, REVS over 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. IWD is less concentrated, with 29.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.6%.
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 | IWD | REVS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.19% |
| AUM | $83.2B | $370M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.43% | 1.84% |
| Holdings | 869 | 611 |
| YTD Return | +21.07%Best | +18.22% |
| 1Y Return | +27.09%Best | +23.33% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.91%Best | +20.60% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.56% | +12.45%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.9% | 16.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -38.5% | -37.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,280 | $17,980Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 29.7%Best | 33.6% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Columbia Threadneedle Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 22, 2000 | Sep 25, 2019 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 25, 2019 to Oct 14, 2026 (7.1 years).
IWD vs REVS 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 7.1 years both funds cover.
IWD vs REVS Performance
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Columbia Research Enhanced Value ETF (REVS) is an ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Over the past year IWD returned +27.09% while REVS returned +23.33%. Year to date, IWD is up 21.07% versus a gain of 18.22% for REVS.
Over three years, IWD compounded at +20.91% per year against +20.60% for REVS; over five years the annualized figures are +11.56% and +12.45% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, REVS has the edge at +13.26% annualized vs +11.84%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 16.5% for REVS. 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 -38.5% for IWD and -37.9% for REVS. 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
IWD charges 0.18% per year while REVS charges 0.19%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $19 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IWD currently yields 1.43% against 1.84% for REVS.
Holdings Overlap
35.9% of IWD's money is in holdings REVS also owns. 96.6% of REVS's money is in holdings IWD also owns.
Most of REVS is already inside IWD. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
286 positions in common, counted across the 871 positions we hold weights for in IWD and 298 in REVS, against full books of 869 and 611.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 2 positions for REVS that do not appear in our book for IWD (1.4% of the fund), and 522 for IWD that do not appear in REVS (62.6%).
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 IWD | Weight in REVS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.01% | 8.48% | 2.47% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.23% | 7.16% | 1.93% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 0.89% | 3.84% | 2.95% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 1.05% | 2.92% | 1.87% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 0.80% | 2.05% | 1.25% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.18% | 1.62% | 0.44% |
| MOAltria Group Inc | 0.31% | 2.21% | 1.90% |
| CCitigroup Inc. | 0.49% | 1.96% | 1.47% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.16% | 1.11% | 0.05% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 0.34% | 1.72% | 1.38% |
96.6% of REVS is already inside IWD.
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, IWD or REVS?
IWD has an expense ratio of 0.18% while REVS charges 0.19%. IWD is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IWD or REVS?
Over the past year IWD returned +27.09% vs +23.33% for REVS, so IWD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), IWD annualized +11.84% vs +13.26% for REVS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IWD or REVS?
IWD has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 16.5% for REVS. Worst drawdown: IWD -38.5% vs REVS -37.9%.
Should I hold both IWD and REVS?
IWD and REVS 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 IWD and REVS?
96.6% of REVS's money is in holdings IWD also owns. 96.6% of REVS's is in holdings IWD also owns. They hold 286 positions in common, counted across the 871 positions we hold weights for in IWD and 298 in REVS.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWD or REVS?
IWD yields 1.43% while REVS yields 1.84%, so REVS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is REVS better than IWD?
IWD has a lower expense ratio. IWD led over 1Y and 3Y, REVS over 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. IWD is less concentrated, with 29.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.