AGRH vs. IWM
AGRH (iShares Interest Rate Hedged U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AGRH is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the BlackRock Interest Rate Hedged U.S. Aggregate Bond Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, AGRH returned 5.97%/yr vs 17.88%/yr for IWM. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AGRH charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
AGRH vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AGRH achieves a 1.78% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.
AGRH
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.73%
- YTD
- 1.78%
- 6M
- 2.44%
- 1Y
- 6.30%
- 3Y*
- 5.97%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWM
- 1D
- -1.37%
- 1M
- 3.52%
- YTD
- 17.07%
- 6M
- 15.83%
- 1Y
- 39.10%
- 3Y*
- 17.88%
- 5Y*
- 6.11%
- 10Y*
- 10.93%
AGRH vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGRH iShares Interest Rate Hedged U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 1.78% | 6.00% | 5.93% | 6.40% | 1.76% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 17.07% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | 0.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between AGRH and IWM is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2022 | 0.38 |
AGRH vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
AGRH
IWM
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Energy
AGRH
IWM
Basic Materials
AGRH
-
IWM
Communication Services
AGRH
-
IWM
Consumer Cyclical
AGRH
-
IWM
Consumer Defensive
AGRH
-
IWM
Financial Services
AGRH
-
IWM
Healthcare
AGRH
-
IWM
Industrials
AGRH
-
IWM
Real Estate
AGRH
-
IWM
Technology
AGRH
-
IWM
Utilities
AGRH
-
IWM
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AGRH vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
AGRH
IWM
AGRH vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Interest Rate Hedged U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (AGRH) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| AGRH | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +4.81 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.12 | 1.34 | +0.78 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.44 | 3.56 | +5.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 44.94 | 12.64 | +32.29 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AGRH | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.41 | 2.05 | +2.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.27 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 3.13 | 0.37 | +2.76 |
Drawdowns
AGRH vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AGRH drawdown since its inception was -1.73%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGRH and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AGRH | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.73% | -59.05% | +57.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.67% | -11.03% | +10.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.73% | -27.50% | +25.77% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -31.91% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.07% | -1.49% | +1.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.16% | -10.77% | +10.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.14% | 3.10% | -2.96% |
Volatility
AGRH vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Interest Rate Hedged U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (AGRH) is 0.43%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that AGRH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AGRH | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.43% | 5.75% | -5.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.00% | 13.53% | -12.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.44% | 19.20% | -17.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.78% | 22.52% | -20.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.78% | 23.04% | -21.26% |
AGRH vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
AGRH has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
AGRH vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
AGRH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.18%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGRH iShares Interest Rate Hedged U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 4.18% | 4.63% | 5.17% | 4.69% | 1.24% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.88% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AGRH and IWM have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to AGRH (0.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGRH dropped -1.73% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 3-year performance, IWM leads with 17.88% vs 5.97% for AGRH. On fees, AGRH is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, AGRH has been the lower-risk option at 0.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, IWM has performed better with a 17.88% return vs 5.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AGRH is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.
AGRH has the higher dividend yield at 4.18%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.
AGRH is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. AGRH tracks BlackRock Interest Rate Hedged U.S. Aggregate Bond Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for AGRH and 0.19% for IWM.
AGRH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.41 vs 2.05), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for AGRH and IWM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer