IWF vs REGS
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF vs Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, IWF or REGS?
REGS has been ahead.
IWF has a lower expense ratio. REGS led over 1Y. REGS is less concentrated, with 51.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.4%.
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 | IWF | REGS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18%Best | 0.35% |
| AUM | $129.6B | $77M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.34% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 370 | 124 |
| YTD Return | +5.65% | +13.80%Best |
| 1Y Return | +7.28% | - |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.37% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.59% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.4% | 51.6%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Columbia Threadneedle Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 22, 2000 | Mar 16, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
IWF vs REGS 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IWF vs REGS Performance
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF (REGS) is an ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Year to date, IWF is up 5.65% versus a gain of 13.80% for REGS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IWF charges 0.18% per year while REGS 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, IWF currently yields 0.34% against 0.00% for REGS.
Holdings Overlap
66.2% of IWF's money is in holdings REGS also owns. 85.3% of REGS's money is in holdings IWF also owns.
Most of REGS is already inside IWF. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
41 positions in common, counted across the 372 positions we hold weights for in IWF and 55 in REGS, against full books of 370 and 124.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 13 positions for REGS that do not appear in our book for IWF (12.6% of the fund), and 266 for IWF that do not appear in REGS (33.4%).
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 IWF | Weight in REGS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 15.77% | 10.73% | 5.04% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.58% | 7.36% | 0.22% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.58% | 4.97% | 0.61% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.68% | 5.23% | 0.55% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 4.66% | 4.43% | 0.23% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.82% | 4.70% | 0.88% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.62% | 4.51% | 0.89% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 5.77% | 1.55% | 4.22% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.69% | 3.89% | 1.20% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.93% | 3.44% | 0.51% |
85.3% of REGS 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, IWF or REGS?
IWF has an expense ratio of 0.18% while REGS charges 0.35%. IWF is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between IWF and REGS?
85.3% of REGS's money is in holdings IWF also owns. 85.3% of REGS's is in holdings IWF also owns. They hold 41 positions in common, counted across the 372 positions we hold weights for in IWF and 55 in REGS.
Which pays a higher dividend, IWF or REGS?
IWF yields 0.34% while REGS yields 0.00%, so IWF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is REGS better than IWF?
IWF has a lower expense ratio. REGS led over 1Y. REGS is less concentrated, with 51.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.