Verified factor-similar pair

ILCV vs IWD

These two ETFs pass the same FF6 US similarity lane: US-listed equity ETFs, same USD model basis, at least one material non-market factor, and 100% overlap in statistically significant material factor exposure.

HML
Similarity score
93
Near substitute

Score blends exposure-level distance, factor-vector shape, market-beta closeness, and a small backtested relative-Sharpe term.

ILCV

iShares Morningstar Value ETF
HML
Adj. R2
0.927
Rel. Sharpe
0.926
Mkt beta
0.89
AUM
US$1.2B
MER
0.04%
Valuation
153

IWD

iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
HML
Adj. R2
0.961
Rel. Sharpe
0.956
Mkt beta
0.94
AUM
US$72.9B
MER
0.18%
Valuation
138

Factor Exposure Match

Blue bars compare raw factor beta magnitude. Green bars compare absolute t-stat strength. Dim bars indicate the t-stat is below 1.96.

SMB
ILCV
-0.17
|t|
-5.5
IWD
-0.04
|t|
-2.1
diff -0.13
HML
ILCV
+0.31
|t|
+10.1
IWD
+0.31
|t|
+15.0
diff -0.01
RMW
ILCV
+0.03
|t|
+0.7
IWD
+0.08
|t|
+3.3
diff -0.05
CMA
ILCV
+0.13
|t|
+2.8
IWD
+0.14
|t|
+4.7
diff -0.01
UMD
ILCV
-0.01
|t|
-0.6
IWD
-0.03
|t|
-2.7
diff +0.02

Why This Pair Matches

Exposure level
93
Exposure shape
96
Mkt beta diff
0.04
Rel. Sharpe diff
0.030

This comparison focuses on measured factor exposure, not a qualitative review of each fund's portfolio-construction process. Backtested relative Sharpe is included as a secondary signal, while we continue refining a comparison metric that separates factor payoff from alpha. See methodology.

ILCV fund page IWD fund page US ETF Leaders US Universe
Important context

VerifiedBeta publishes educational ETF research, not personalized investment advice, portfolio management, or security recommendations. Funds that screen well here can still be unsuitable for your objectives, taxes, liquidity needs, or constraints. Review fund documents, methodology assumptions, and your own circumstances before acting. See the full disclaimer.