BDIV vs. IWX

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

BDIV (AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF) and IWX (iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. BDIV is actively managed, while IWX is passively managed. Over the past year, BDIV returned 20.14% vs 34.92% for IWX. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. BDIV charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for IWX.

Performance

BDIV vs. IWX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF (IWX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDIV achieves a 10.04% return, which is significantly lower than IWX's 20.90% return.

BDIV

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 1.31%
• 6M: 7.69%
• YTD: 10.04%
• 1Y: 20.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.95%

IWX

• 1D: 0.74%
• 1M: 2.59%
• 6M: 15.57%
• YTD: 20.90%
• 1Y: 34.92%
• 3Y*: 18.98%
• 5Y*: 12.65%
• 10Y*: 12.13%
• ALL TIME*: 11.70%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	$66.95K	$59.67K	$64.41K
IWX iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF	$55.11M	$49.72M	$33.93M

BDIV vs. IWX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	10.04%	18.59%	3.01%
IWX iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF	20.90%	18.23%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between BDIV and IWX is 0.79, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024	0.83

The correlation between BDIV and IWX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

BDIV vs. IWX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BDIV	IWX
Technology	21.3%	22.6%
Financial Services	14.4%	20.0%
Industrials	13.8%	8.3%
Healthcare	10.9%	13.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	8.2%
Utilities	6.6%	2.6%
Energy	6.1%	5.1%
Communication Services	5.2%	3.5%
Consumer Cyclical	4.4%	11.6%
Basic Materials	4.2%	2.8%
Real Estate	3.7%	1.8%

Return for Risk

BDIV vs. IWX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BDIV

BDIV Risk / Return Rank: 83
BDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
BDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
BDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
BDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 82

IWX

IWX Risk / Return Rank: 95
IWX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
IWX Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
IWX Omega Ratio Rank: 95
IWX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
IWX Martin Ratio Rank: 96

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BDIV vs. IWX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF (IWX). 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.

	BDIV	IWX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	3.10	-1.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	4.28	-1.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.55	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	5.05	-2.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.97	22.22	-11.25

BDIV vs. IWX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BDIV Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is lower than the IWX Sharpe Ratio of 3.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BDIV and IWX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BDIV vs. IWX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDIV drawdown since its inception was -14.98%, smaller than the maximum IWX drawdown of -35.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDIV and IWX.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDIV	IWX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.98%	-35.76%	+20.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	-6.59%	-0.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.37%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.13%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	0.00%	-0.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.87%	-3.79%	+1.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	1.50%	+0.26%

Volatility

BDIV vs. IWX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) is 2.46%, while iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF (IWX) has a volatility of 3.10%. This indicates that BDIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BDIV	IWX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.46%	3.10%	-0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.15%	8.46%	-1.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.69%	10.81%	-1.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.06%	13.89%	-0.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.06%	16.48%	-3.42%

BDIV vs. IWX - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDIV has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than IWX's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

BDIV vs. IWX - Dividend Comparison

BDIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, more than IWX's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	1.55%	1.14%	0.62%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWX iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF	1.39%	1.59%	1.97%	2.13%	2.07%	1.79%	2.12%	2.60%	2.66%	2.12%	2.22%	2.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDIV and IWX in my portfolio?

BDIV and IWX have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BDIV or IWX?

IWX has higher volatility (3.10%) compared to BDIV (2.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDIV dropped -14.98% vs IWX's -35.76%.

Which ETF is better, BDIV or IWX?

On 1-year performance, IWX leads with 34.92% vs 20.14% for BDIV. On fees, IWX is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, BDIV has been the lower-risk option at 2.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BDIV or IWX?

Over the 1-year period, IWX has performed better with a 34.92% return vs 20.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDIV or IWX?

IWX is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for BDIV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BDIV or IWX?

BDIV has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 1.39% for IWX.

What is the main difference between BDIV and IWX?

They also come from different issuers: AAM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for BDIV and 0.20% for IWX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.10 vs 2.00), 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.