ARKW vs. IWF
ARKW (ARK Next Generation Internet ETF) and IWF (iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ARKW is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by ARK, while IWF is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index. ARKW is actively managed, while IWF is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ARKW returned 22.51%/yr vs 18.17%/yr for IWF. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ARKW charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IWF.
Performance
ARKW vs. IWF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ARKW achieves a -4.37% return, which is significantly lower than IWF's 2.87% return. Over the past 10 years, ARKW has outperformed IWF with an annualized return of 22.51%, while IWF has yielded a comparatively lower 18.17% annualized return.
ARKW
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- -1.28%
- YTD
- -4.37%
- 6M
- -7.45%
- 1Y
- 10.34%
- 3Y*
- 36.42%
- 5Y*
- 0.46%
- 10Y*
- 22.51%
IWF
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- -2.22%
- YTD
- 2.87%
- 6M
- 3.39%
- 1Y
- 20.40%
- 3Y*
- 22.33%
- 5Y*
- 13.90%
- 10Y*
- 18.17%
ARKW vs. IWF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ARKW ARK Next Generation Internet ETF | -4.37% | 38.93% | 42.27% | 96.89% | -67.49% | -18.85% | 157.44% | 35.76% | 4.24% | 87.29% |
IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | 2.87% | 18.33% | 33.12% | 42.59% | -29.31% | 27.43% | 38.25% | 35.86% | -1.67% | 29.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between ARKW and IWF is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2014 | 0.76 |
The correlation between ARKW and IWF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
ARKW vs. IWF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ARKW
IWF
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
ARKW
IWF
Consumer Cyclical
ARKW
IWF
Communication Services
ARKW
IWF
Financial Services
ARKW
IWF
Industrials
ARKW
IWF
Basic Materials
ARKW
-
IWF
Consumer Defensive
ARKW
-
IWF
Energy
ARKW
-
IWF
Healthcare
ARKW
-
IWF
Real Estate
ARKW
-
IWF
Utilities
ARKW
-
IWF
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
ARKW vs. IWF — Risk / Return Rank
ARKW
IWF
ARKW vs. IWF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ARK Next Generation Internet ETF (ARKW) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ARKW | IWF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.21 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.29 | 1.16 | -0.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.59 | 3.83 | -3.25 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ARKW vs. IWF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ARKW drawdown since its inception was -80.52%, which is greater than IWF's maximum drawdown of -64.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARKW and IWF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ARKW | IWF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.52% | -64.25% | -16.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.21% | -16.27% | -19.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -36.21% | -23.36% | -12.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -77.36% | -32.72% | -44.64% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -80.52% | -32.72% | -47.80% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.35% | -5.56% | -17.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.97% | -22.06% | -1.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.89% | 4.93% | +12.96% |
Volatility
ARKW vs. IWF - Volatility Comparison
ARK Next Generation Internet ETF (ARKW) has a higher volatility of 10.38% compared to iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) at 5.36%. This indicates that ARKW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ARKW | IWF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.38% | 5.36% | +5.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.57% | 12.40% | +12.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.92% | 15.95% | +16.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.59% | 21.46% | +22.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.73% | 21.00% | +16.73% |
ARKW vs. IWF - Expense Ratio Comparison
ARKW has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than IWF's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
ARKW vs. IWF - Dividend Comparison
ARKW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, more than IWF's 0.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ARKW ARK Next Generation Internet ETF | 1.66% | 1.59% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.17% | 1.29% | 0.00% | 13.05% | 2.05% | 0.00% | 2.29% |
IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | 0.35% | 0.36% | 0.46% | 0.67% | 0.91% | 0.49% | 0.66% | 0.99% | 1.27% | 1.10% | 1.43% | 1.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ARKW and IWF have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ARKW has higher volatility (10.38%) compared to IWF (5.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ARKW dropped -80.52% vs IWF's -64.25%.
On 10-year performance, ARKW leads with 22.51% vs 18.17% for IWF. On fees, IWF is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IWF has been the lower-risk option at 5.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ARKW has performed better with a 22.51% return vs 18.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWF is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for ARKW.
ARKW has the higher dividend yield at 1.66%, compared with 0.35% for IWF.
ARKW is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while IWF is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: ARK and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for ARKW and 0.18% for IWF.
IWF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 0.32), 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 ARKW and IWF
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