PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
BLES vs. IWB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

BLES vs. IWB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BLES (Inspire Global Hope ETF) and IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BLES is a Global Equities fund tracking the Inspire Global Hope Large Cap Equal Weight Index, while IWB is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BLES returned 7.19%/yr vs 12.20%/yr for IWB. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BLES charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for IWB.

Performance

BLES vs. IWB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Inspire Global Hope ETF (BLES) and iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLES achieves a 9.82% return, which is significantly higher than IWB's 8.01% return.

BLES

1D
-1.34%
1M
-0.63%
YTD
9.82%
6M
9.21%
1Y
20.14%
3Y*
15.36%
5Y*
7.19%
10Y*
—

IWB

1D
-1.32%
1M
-1.04%
YTD
8.01%
6M
7.03%
1Y
22.97%
3Y*
20.50%
5Y*
12.20%
10Y*
15.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BLES vs. IWB - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BLES
Inspire Global Hope ETF		9.82%19.25%5.59%16.47%-16.21%24.36%12.22%28.39%-13.43%15.23%
IWB
iShares Russell 1000 ETF		8.01%17.18%24.32%26.39%-19.19%26.32%20.77%31.06%-4.90%14.45%

Correlation

The correlation between BLES and IWB is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

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

0.80

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

0.82

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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2017

0.83

The correlation between BLES and IWB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

BLES vs. IWB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
BLES
IWB

Industrials

20.3%
8.7%

Technology

17.6%
37.3%

Financial Services

13.0%
11.3%

Basic Materials

9.8%
1.9%

Real Estate

7.6%
2.1%

Healthcare

7.0%
8.5%

Utilities

7.0%
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%
10.0%

Energy

6.0%
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.4%
4.4%

Communication Services

1.0%
10.4%

Industrials

BLES
20.3%
IWB
8.7%

Technology

BLES
17.6%
IWB
37.3%

Financial Services

BLES
13.0%
IWB
11.3%

Basic Materials

BLES
9.8%
IWB
1.9%

Real Estate

BLES
7.6%
IWB
2.1%

Healthcare

BLES
7.0%
IWB
8.5%

Utilities

BLES
7.0%
IWB
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

BLES
6.3%
IWB
10.0%

Energy

BLES
6.0%
IWB
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

BLES
4.4%
IWB
4.4%

Communication Services

BLES
1.0%
IWB
10.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Inspire Global Hope ETF

iShares Russell 1000 ETF

Often compared with BLES:
BLES vs. BIBLBLES vs. WWJDBLES vs. YALLBLES vs. SCHDBLES vs. TQQQBLES vs. GABFBLES vs. VTI
Often compared with IWB:
IWB vs. IWMIWB vs. SPYIWB vs. VONEIWB vs. IWDIWB vs. VOOIWB vs. IWVIWB vs. VTI

Return for Risk

BLES vs. IWB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
BLES
BLES Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
BLES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BLES Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
BLES Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
BLES Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
BLES Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank
IWB
IWB Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
IWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWB Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
IWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWB Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
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.

BLES vs. IWB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Inspire Global Hope ETF (BLES) and iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB). 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.

BLESIWBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.57
1.84

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.22
2.51

-0.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.33

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.44

2.60

-0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.14

11.56

-2.42

BLES vs. IWB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLES Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is comparable to the IWB Sharpe Ratio of 1.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLES and IWB, 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

BLES vs. IWB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLES drawdown since its inception was -40.35%, smaller than the maximum IWB drawdown of -55.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLES and IWB.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

BLESIWBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.35%

-55.38%

+15.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.29%

-8.86%

+0.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.46%

-19.09%

+3.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.61%

-25.20%

-1.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-34.60%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.45%

-2.98%

+0.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.02%

-10.84%

+4.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

1.99%

+0.22%

Volatility

BLES vs. IWB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Inspire Global Hope ETF (BLES) is 4.39%, while iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) has a volatility of 4.84%. This indicates that BLES experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

BLESIWBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.39%

4.84%

-0.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.21%

9.88%

+0.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.92%

12.57%

+0.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.50%

17.20%

-0.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.93%

18.15%

+0.78%

BLES vs. IWB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLES has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than IWB's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

BLES vs. IWB - Dividend Comparison

BLES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, more than IWB's 0.94% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BLES
Inspire Global Hope ETF		1.81%1.97%1.90%1.80%1.64%9.28%1.61%2.16%1.73%2.01%0.00%0.00%
IWB
iShares Russell 1000 ETF		0.94%1.00%1.14%1.31%1.56%1.09%1.37%1.71%2.06%1.64%1.89%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

BLES and IWB have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWB has higher volatility (4.84%) compared to BLES (4.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLES dropped -40.35% vs IWB's -55.38%.

On 5-year performance, IWB leads with 12.20% vs 7.19% for BLES. On fees, IWB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BLES has been the lower-risk option at 4.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWB has performed better with a 12.20% return vs 7.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for BLES.

BLES has the higher dividend yield at 1.81%, compared with 0.94% for IWB.

BLES is categorized as Global Equities, while IWB is Large Cap Blend Equities. BLES tracks Inspire Global Hope Large Cap Equal Weight Index, while IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Inspire and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for BLES and 0.15% for IWB.

IWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.57), 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 BLES and IWB

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