PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BIV vs. IWP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BIV vs. IWP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF (BIV) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BIV achieves a -0.40% return, which is significantly lower than IWP's 0.63% return. Over the past 10 years, BIV has underperformed IWP with an annualized return of 1.75%, while IWP has yielded a comparatively higher 11.64% annualized return.


BIV

1D
-0.26%
1M
-0.41%
6M
-0.26%
YTD
-0.40%
1Y
3.43%
3Y*
4.27%
5Y*
-0.08%
10Y*
1.75%
ALL TIME*
3.79%

IWP

1D
0.00%
1M
-3.07%
6M
-2.52%
YTD
0.63%
1Y
-1.82%
3Y*
12.07%
5Y*
4.51%
10Y*
11.64%
ALL TIME*
9.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BIV vs. IWP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BIV
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF
-0.40%8.52%1.57%6.07%-13.21%-2.40%9.67%10.34%-0.19%3.65%
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.63%8.45%21.86%25.70%-26.90%12.60%35.25%35.04%-4.89%24.93%

Correlation

The correlation between BIV and IWP is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.33

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

0.24

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

0.20

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

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2007

-0.12

The correlation between BIV and IWP shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (all time) to 0.33 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

BIV vs. IWP — Risk / Return Rank

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

BIV
BIV Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
BIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
BIV Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
BIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
BIV Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

IWP
IWP Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 88
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.

BIV vs. IWP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF (BIV) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). 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.


BIVIWPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.00

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.09

-0.12

+1.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.80

-0.35

+3.15

BIV vs. IWP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BIV Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is higher than the IWP Sharpe Ratio of -0.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BIV and IWP, 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...

Drawdowns

BIV vs. IWP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BIV drawdown since its inception was -18.95%, smaller than the maximum IWP drawdown of -56.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BIV and IWP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BIVIWPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.95%

-56.92%

+37.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.18%

-14.79%

+11.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.55%

-25.20%

+19.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.74%

-38.62%

+19.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.95%

-38.62%

+19.67%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.20%

-6.02%

+3.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.38%

-9.65%

+6.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.23%

5.19%

-3.96%

Volatility

BIV vs. IWP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF (BIV) is 1.18%, while iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) has a volatility of 5.06%. This indicates that BIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BIVIWPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.18%

5.06%

-3.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.15%

13.78%

-10.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.04%

17.32%

-13.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.41%

22.44%

-16.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.50%

21.69%

-16.19%

BIV vs. IWP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BIV has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than IWP's 0.23% 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

BIV vs. IWP - Dividend Comparison

BIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.26%, more than IWP's 0.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BIV
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF
4.26%4.01%3.79%3.09%2.41%3.42%2.95%2.75%2.88%2.69%3.01%3.02%
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.36%0.37%0.40%0.54%0.77%0.30%0.38%0.59%1.02%0.78%1.16%0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


BIV and IWP have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWP has higher volatility (5.06%) compared to BIV (1.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BIV dropped -18.95% vs IWP's -56.92%.

On 10-year performance, IWP leads with 11.64% vs 1.75% for BIV. On fees, BIV is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, BIV has been the lower-risk option at 1.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWP has performed better with a 11.64% return vs 1.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BIV is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for IWP.

BIV has the higher dividend yield at 4.26%, compared with 0.36% for IWP.

BIV is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while IWP is Mid Cap Growth Equities. BIV tracks Bloomberg U.S. 5–10 Year Government/Credit Float Adjusted Bond Index, while IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for BIV and 0.23% for IWP.

BIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.85 vs -0.11), 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 BIV and IWP

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