Core Viewpoint - The Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF (VOOG) and iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) present distinct investment profiles, with VOOG focusing on large-cap growth stocks and IWO on small-cap growth companies, impacting their cost, volatility, and diversification characteristics [1][2]. Cost and Size Comparison - VOOG has a lower expense ratio of 0.07% compared to IWO's 0.24%, making it more cost-effective for long-term investors [3][4]. - As of December 11, 2025, VOOG reported a 1-year return of 22.3% while IWO had a return of 13.5% [3]. - VOOG has an Assets Under Management (AUM) of $21.7 billion, significantly higher than IWO's $13.6 billion [3]. Performance and Risk Metrics - Over the past five years, VOOG experienced a maximum drawdown of -32.74%, while IWO faced a larger drawdown of -42.02% [5]. - An investment of $1,000 in VOOG would have grown to $1,973 over five years, compared to $1,190 for IWO [5]. Portfolio Composition - IWO holds 1,086 small-cap companies with significant sector weights in healthcare (25%), industrials (22%), and technology (21%), ensuring broad diversification [6]. - VOOG is heavily concentrated in large-cap growth stocks, with technology comprising 41% of its portfolio, featuring top holdings like Nvidia, Microsoft, and Apple [7]. Investment Implications - VOOG is suitable for investors seeking lower-risk growth through established large-cap companies, primarily in the technology sector [9][11]. - IWO appeals to those looking for higher growth potential from smaller companies, despite a higher risk profile and expense ratio [10][11].

Core Insights - The Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF (MGK) is more concentrated with 66 holdings and 69% of assets in technology, while the Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF (VOOG) holds 217 stocks, providing broader diversification [1][2][4] - Both funds have the same low expense ratio of 0.07%, but VOOG offers a slightly higher yield compared to MGK [3][6] - The primary distinction between the two funds lies in their exposure to the technology sector, with MGK having a heavier tilt towards tech stocks [7][8] Fund Comparison - MGK's top three positions—NVIDIA, Apple, and Microsoft—account for over 38% of its portfolio, while VOOG's largest positions are NVIDIA (15.3%), Microsoft (6.2%), and Apple (5.7%) [1][2][7] - VOOG has a more diversified sector allocation, with technology making up 44% of assets, followed by communication services at 15% and consumer cyclical at 12% [2][5] - Investors should consider their desired exposure to technology when choosing between MGK and VOOG, as MGK is more concentrated in this sector [8]

Core Insights - The iShares Semiconductor ETF (SOXX) and the Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) offer different investment strategies within the tech sector, with SOXX focusing exclusively on semiconductors and VGT providing broader exposure to various technology industries [1][2] Expense and Size Comparison - SOXX has an expense ratio of 0.34% and assets under management (AUM) of $16.7 billion, while VGT has a lower expense ratio of 0.09% and AUM of $130.0 billion [3] - The one-year return for SOXX is 47.25%, significantly higher than VGT's 23.06%, although SOXX has a slightly higher dividend yield of 0.55% compared to VGT's 0.41% [3] Performance and Risk Metrics - Over five years, SOXX has a maximum drawdown of -45.75%, while VGT's is -35.08% [4] - A $1,000 investment in SOXX would have grown to $2,541, compared to $2,292 for VGT over the same period [4] Portfolio Composition - VGT holds 314 stocks, with major positions in Nvidia (18.18%), Apple (14.29%), and Microsoft (12.93%), indicating a heavy concentration in mega-cap tech [5] - SOXX is concentrated in 30 semiconductor companies, with top holdings including Advanced Micro Devices, Broadcom, and Micron Technology, each representing around 7% to 8% of the fund [6] Investment Implications - SOXX's focused approach may lead to higher returns during semiconductor industry growth but also increases risk due to lack of diversification [7][10] - VGT's broader portfolio can mitigate risk during market volatility, making it potentially less susceptible to downturns in the semiconductor sector [9][11]