What is an ETF expense ratio and why is it important?

The expense ratio represents the annual cost of managing a fund, deducted from assets. IJH has a 0.05% ratio, while IWR has 0.18%. Although these numbers seem small, they compound over time, potentially reducing overall returns. Lower fees generally allow more of your investment to remain working for you, making expense ratios a key metric when comparing similar funds.

What does net asset size indicate about a fund?

Net assets reflect the total value of holdings in a fund and often correlate with liquidity. IJH has $123.7 billion in net assets, whereas IWR has $55.5 billion. Larger asset bases typically mean tighter bid-ask spreads and easier trading. While size alone does not guarantee performance, it influences how efficiently investors can enter or exit positions without significant price impact.

How do the dividend yields of these mid-cap funds compare?

IJH offers a 1.23% dividend yield, while IWR provides 1.16%. These figures represent the annual income generated relative to the fund’s price. Investors seeking slightly higher current income might look at IJH, whereas IWR provides a comparable but marginally lower yield. Both yields are modest and typical for mid-cap blend categories, where growth often takes precedence over high dividends.

Are the top holdings of these two ETFs similar?

Based on the provided data, there are no shared top-10 holdings between the two funds. IJH’s top holdings are not available, limiting direct comparison. In contrast, IWR lists specific positions such as MPC at 0.92% and SNOW at 0.82%. This lack of overlap in disclosed holdings suggests different portfolio constructions, even if both target the same mid-cap category, requiring investors to examine underlying exposures carefully.

What should I know about IWR’s top holdings?

IWR provides detailed top holdings, which enhances transparency for investors analysing specific exposures. The largest position is MPC at 0.92%, followed by SNOW at 0.82% and PSX at 0.81%. This granular view allows for precise assessment of individual stock concentration and potential sector implications. Such detailed disclosure helps investors understand the fund’s specific composition rather than relying solely on category descriptions.

How do inception dates influence a fund's track record?

IJH was established in May 2000, while IWR began in July 2001. A longer track record can provide more historical data for performance analysis across various market cycles. Both funds have extensive operating histories of over twenty years. These long tenures suggest stability and established management processes, though past performance does not guarantee future results.

Can I find sector weights for these ETFs?

Currently, sector weight data is not available for either IJH or IWR. This limitation makes it difficult to assess diversification across industries like technology or healthcare. Without these details, investors must rely on the fund category, mid-cap blend, and any disclosed top holdings. This lack of transparency requires careful consideration when evaluating risk exposure and portfolio construction.

What does the fund category tell us?

Both IJH and IWR are classified as Mid-Cap Blend ETFs. This category typically includes companies with medium market capitalisation that exhibit a mix of growth and value characteristics. Mid-caps often occupy a middle ground between the stability of large-caps and the higher volatility of small-caps. Understanding this classification helps set expectations for risk and return profiles associated with these specific funds.

Why is tracking data unavailable for these funds?

The provided data indicates that the specific index tracked is not available for either IJH or IWR. Without knowing the underlying index, it is challenging to determine precise replication strategies or tracking error potential. Investors usually rely on index names to understand benchmark methodologies. In this case, reliance falls on fund names and category descriptions rather than specific index details.

Which fund has a lower cost?

IJH has a lower expense ratio of 0.05% compared to IWR’s 0.18%. This difference of 0.13 percentage points means IJH is less costly to hold annually. Over long periods, this fee advantage could result in slightly higher net returns for IJH holders, assuming performance and market conditions remain similar. However, total returns depend on many factors beyond just fees.

Does IJH offer more liquidity?

With $123.7 billion in net assets, IJH is significantly larger than IWR, which has $55.5 billion. Larger funds generally exhibit higher trading volumes and better liquidity, reducing the cost of buying or selling shares. This scale can be advantageous for active traders or those moving larger sums, as it minimises market impact. However, both funds remain substantial and likely liquid enough for most retail investors.

How are ETF dividends distributed?

ETF dividends, like those from IJH and IWR, represent income from underlying stock holdings distributed to shareholders. Yield percentages indicate the estimated annual payout relative to the current price. These distributions are not guaranteed and vary based on company decisions within the fund. Investors typically receive these payments quarterly, though schedules can differ. Reinvesting dividends is a common strategy for compounding returns over time.

IJH vs IWR

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IJH) and iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IWR). This page analyses expenses, holdings, dividends and market tracking. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

IJH

Metric

IWR

0.05%

Expense Ratio

0.18%

1.23%

Dividend Yield

1.16%

$123.67B

Net Assets

$55.47B

413

Holdings

830

May 22, 2000

Inception Date

Jul 17, 2001

–

Index Tracked

–

Mid-Cap Blend

Fund Category

Mid-Cap Blend

IJH costs about $13.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

These funds do not share any of their top holdings.

Discover More Comparisons

IJH vs MDY

Compare IJH and MDY fees of 0.05% vs 0.23%, dividends, holdings and tracking. Assess mid-cap ETF differences using factual data for informed research.

IJH vs VO

Compare IJH and VO on fees, dividends and holdings. IJH costs 0.05 percent while VO costs 0.03 percent. Explore yield data and transparency.

IJH vs SPMD

Compare IJH vs SPMD mid-cap ETFs. Review fees, holdings, dividends, and tracking. SPMD is 0.03% expense ratio vs IJH 0.05%. See data details.

Investment Analysis

IJH

Pros

The ETF offers a low 0.05% expense ratio, reducing long-term investment costs for holders.
With $123.7 billion in net assets, it provides excellent liquidity and substantial market depth for traders.
The fund's inception in May 2000 offers a long track record for investors seeking stability.

Considerations

Data regarding index tracked, top holdings, and sector weights are currently not available.
The 1.23% dividend yield may be considered lower compared to some income-focused mid-cap alternatives.
Lack of transparency on current top holdings limits individual investor analysis of specific portfolio exposures.

IWR

Pros

The ETF provides detailed top holdings, with the largest single position at 0.92%, enabling precise portfolio analysis.
Established in July 2001, it offers a proven investment history for potential market performance evaluation.
A 1.16% dividend yield is available for those seeking some income from the mid-cap blend category.

Considerations

The higher 0.18% expense ratio significantly increases ongoing costs compared to lower-fee mid-cap options.
Net assets of $55.5 billion, while substantial, represent roughly half the liquidity of its sibling fund.
Sector weight data remains unavailable, hindering comprehensive risk and sector diversification assessment by investors.

About IJH and IWR

IJH (IJH)

The iShares Core S&P Mid-Cap ETF (IJH) offers investors exposure to a broad range of mid-capitalisation companies within the United States. Categorized as a Mid-Cap Blend fund, it aims to track the performance of the S&P MidCap 400 Index, which represents approximately the middle two-thirds of the investable U.S. equity market. With net assets exceeding USD 123 billion, it is one of the largest ETFs in its category, providing substantial liquidity. The fund holds 413 distinct companies, allowing for diversified exposure across various sectors. It features a low expense ratio of 0.05%, making it a cost-effective tool for building core portfolios. Established in May 2000, this fund has a long history of operational stability. While it currently lists a dividend yield of 1.23%, it is important to note that dividend distributions are not guaranteed and can fluctuate based on the underlying holdings' performance. As with any equity investment, the value of this ETF can go down as well as up, and past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results.

IWR (IWR)

This ETF aims to track the performance of the S&P Mid-Cap 400 index, providing investors with exposure to mid-sized companies listed in the United States. It is a passive investment vehicle managed by iShares, known for low costs and broad diversification. The fund features an expense ratio of 0.18% and holds approximately 830 securities. With net assets of USD 55.47 billion, it is a substantial pool of capital designed to offer stability and growth potential. Investors typically use this ETF to capture the upside of established, growing companies that are larger than small caps but smaller than blue-chip giants. Please remember that all investments carry risk, and values can rise and fall.

Buy IJH or IWR in Nemo

🆓

Zero Commission

Trade stocks, ETFs, and more with zero commission. Keep more of your returns.

🔒

Trusted & Regulated

Part of Exinity Group 2015, serving over a million customers globally.

💰

6% Interest on Cash

Earn 6% AER on uninvested cash with daily interest payments.

IJH vs IWR

Fund Snapshot