Core Insights - The article compares two small-cap value ETFs: SLYV, which tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Value Index, and IWN, which tracks the Russell 2000 Value Index, highlighting their differences in sector allocation, portfolio breadth, and performance [4][5]. Fund Overview - SLYV holds 454 companies with a sector tilt towards financial services (23%), consumer cyclicals (16%), and industrials (15%), with top holdings including Borgwarner, Hecla Mining, and Lincoln National [1]. - IWN has a broader portfolio of 1,407 stocks, primarily focused on financial services (27%), industrials (13%), and healthcare (11%), with top positions including Blk Csh Fnd Treasury Sl Agency, Echostar, and Hecla Mining [2]. Performance and Fees - SLYV is noted for its lower expense ratio and higher dividend yield compared to IWN, which charges 0.09 percentage points more annually [3][6]. - Over the past year, IWN has outperformed SLYV with a return of 13.4% versus 6.4%, although both funds perform comparably over the long term [6]. Sector Allocation - Both funds allocate the largest portion to financials, but SLYV has a more balanced distribution among consumer discretionary, industrials, and information technology, while IWN has healthcare as its third-largest sector [7]. - Investors seeking more healthcare exposure may prefer IWN, whereas those looking for more technology stocks may favor SLYV [7]. Individual Holdings - A notable difference in individual holdings is that IWN's largest holding is a money market fund, constituting 1% of the fund, contrasting with SLYV, which has stocks as its top ten holdings [8].

Core Insights - The Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) focuses on tech-heavy growth stocks with higher recent returns, while the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) offers broader diversification, lower risk, and a larger dividend payout [1][7]. Cost and Size Comparison - VUG has an expense ratio of 0.04% and assets under management (AUM) of $204.7 billion, while VOO has a lower expense ratio of 0.03% and AUM of $800.2 billion [3]. - VUG's one-year return is 20.0%, compared to VOO's 13.5%, and VOO provides a higher dividend yield of 1.15% versus VUG's 0.43% [3]. Performance and Risk Analysis - Over five years, VUG has a maximum drawdown of -35.61%, while VOO's is -24.53% [4]. - A $1,000 investment in VUG would grow to $2,008 over five years, compared to $1,880 for VOO [4]. Portfolio Composition - VOO holds 504 stocks, with 36% in technology, 13% in financial services, and 11% in consumer cyclicals, providing a diversified risk profile [5]. - VUG allocates 52% to technology, with significant portions in communication services and consumer cyclicals, leading to higher potential volatility [6]. Investment Strategy - VOO is a broad-market fund tracking the S&P 500, suitable for investors seeking stability and average returns [8][10]. - VUG targets above-average growth stocks, historically achieving higher returns but with increased volatility and risk [9][10].