BFLX vs. IWM

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

BFLX (iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BFLX is a Long-Short fund actively managed by iShares, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. BFLX is actively managed, while IWM is passively managed. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BFLX charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

BFLX vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF (BFLX) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

BFLX

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: -2.64%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

IWM

• 1D: -0.59%
• 1M: -1.11%
• 6M: 10.45%
• YTD: 19.24%
• 1Y: 32.84%
• 3Y*: 15.91%
• 5Y*: 6.97%
• 10Y*: 10.65%
• ALL TIME*: 8.76%

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

BFLX vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
BFLX iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF	-0.41%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	7.33%

Correlation

The correlation between BFLX and IWM is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2026	0.73

BFLX vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BFLX	IWM
Technology	29.0%	14.3%
Industrials	14.8%	13.9%
Financial Services	13.7%	17.9%
Consumer Cyclical	13.6%	9.0%
Healthcare	7.4%	20.5%
Communication Services	6.7%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	2.6%
Utilities	3.7%	2.9%
Basic Materials	3.4%	4.3%
Energy	2.6%	5.8%
Real Estate	1.4%	6.6%

Return for Risk

BFLX vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFLX

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 72
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 64
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

BFLX vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF (BFLX) 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.

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.

	BFLX	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.71	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.44	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.29	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.99	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	10.54	—

Drawdowns

BFLX vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFLX drawdown since its inception was -3.85%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFLX and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BFLX	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.85%	-59.05%	+55.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-11.03%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.50%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.91%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.14%	-2.71%	-0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.45%	-10.72%	+9.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.12%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BFLX	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.62%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	14.17%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.83%	19.38%	-5.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.83%	22.49%	-8.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.83%	23.00%	-9.17%

BFLX vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFLX has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

BFLX vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

BFLX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BFLX iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.91%	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

Can I hold both BFLX and IWM in my portfolio?

BFLX and IWM have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BFLX or IWM?

On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BFLX or IWM?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for BFLX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BFLX or IWM?

IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.00% for BFLX.

What is the main difference between BFLX and IWM?

BFLX is categorized as Long-Short, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for BFLX and 0.19% for IWM.