PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AOR vs. AOM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AOR vs. AOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) and iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOR achieves a 7.96% return, which is significantly higher than AOM's 5.49% return. Over the past 10 years, AOR has outperformed AOM with an annualized return of 8.46%, while AOM has yielded a comparatively lower 6.27% annualized return.


AOR

1D
0.22%
1M
3.07%
YTD
7.96%
6M
8.80%
1Y
20.12%
3Y*
14.41%
5Y*
7.20%
10Y*
8.46%

AOM

1D
0.22%
1M
2.21%
YTD
5.49%
6M
6.11%
1Y
15.19%
3Y*
11.04%
5Y*
5.00%
10Y*
6.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AOR vs. AOM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AOR
iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF
7.96%16.44%10.68%15.75%-15.64%11.19%11.42%18.91%-5.82%15.80%
AOM
iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF
5.49%13.28%7.95%12.38%-14.54%6.93%10.02%15.58%-3.88%11.63%

Correlation

The correlation between AOR and AOM is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.95

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.94

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.93

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2008

0.88

The correlation between AOR and AOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

AOR vs. AOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AOR
AOM

Technology

27.8%
27.9%

Financial Services

16.2%
16.1%

Industrials

11.9%
11.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
9.5%

Communication Services

8.1%
8.1%

Healthcare

8.0%
8.0%

Consumer Defensive

5.0%
5.0%

Energy

4.3%
4.3%

Basic Materials

4.2%
4.2%

Utilities

2.7%
2.7%

Real Estate

2.4%
2.4%

Technology

AOR
27.8%
AOM
27.9%

Financial Services

AOR
16.2%
AOM
16.1%

Industrials

AOR
11.9%
AOM
11.9%

Consumer Cyclical

AOR
9.5%
AOM
9.5%

Communication Services

AOR
8.1%
AOM
8.1%

Healthcare

AOR
8.0%
AOM
8.0%

Consumer Defensive

AOR
5.0%
AOM
5.0%

Energy

AOR
4.3%
AOM
4.3%

Basic Materials

AOR
4.2%
AOM
4.2%

Utilities

AOR
2.7%
AOM
2.7%

Real Estate

AOR
2.4%
AOM
2.4%

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

AOR vs. AOM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AOR
AOR Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
AOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
AOR Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
AOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
AOR Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

AOM
AOM Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
AOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
AOM Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
AOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
AOM Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AOR vs. AOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) and iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM). 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.


AORAOMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.41

2.34

+0.07

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.43

3.38

+0.05

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.44

+0.01

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.08

2.99

+0.09

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.48

13.07

+0.41

AOR vs. AOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOR Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the AOM Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOR and AOM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AORAOMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.41

2.34

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

0.62

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

0.79

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.69

0.70

-0.01

Drawdowns

AOR vs. AOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOR drawdown since its inception was -24.44%, which is greater than AOM's maximum drawdown of -19.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOR and AOM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AORAOMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.44%

-19.96%

-4.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.64%

-5.11%

-1.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.77%

-6.85%

-2.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.72%

-19.96%

-1.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.95%

-19.96%

-2.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.48%

-2.70%

-0.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.52%

1.17%

+0.35%

Volatility

AOR vs. AOM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF (AOR) has a higher volatility of 2.70% compared to iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) at 2.15%. This indicates that AOR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AORAOMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.70%

2.15%

+0.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.81%

5.21%

+1.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.40%

6.53%

+1.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.55%

8.14%

+2.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.67%

7.93%

+2.74%

AOR vs. AOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AOR and AOM have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

AOR vs. AOM - Dividend Comparison

AOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.46%, less than AOM's 2.97% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AOM
iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF
2.97%2.98%3.10%2.79%2.27%1.56%2.02%2.66%2.53%3.31%2.14%1.98%
AOR
iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF
2.46%2.55%2.66%2.50%2.12%1.64%1.89%2.56%2.49%4.51%2.16%2.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, AOR and AOM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

AOR has higher volatility (2.70%) compared to AOM (2.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOR dropped -24.44% vs AOM's -19.96%.

On 10-year performance, AOR leads with 8.46% vs 6.27% for AOM. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, AOM has been the lower-risk option at 2.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, AOR has performed better with a 8.46% return vs 6.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AOR and AOM have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

AOM has the higher dividend yield at 2.97%, compared with 2.46% for AOR.

AOR tracks S&P Target Risk Growth Index, while AOM tracks S&P Target Risk Moderate.

AOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 2.34), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AOR and AOM

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