CRQ.NEO vs. IWM
CRQ.NEO (iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CRQ.NEO is a Canada Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI Canada Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CRQ.NEO returned 13.46%/yr vs 11.88%/yr for IWM. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CRQ.NEO charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CRQ.NEO is traded in CAD, while IWM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IWM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRQ.NEO achieves a 17.22% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 20.47% return. Over the past 10 years, CRQ.NEO has outperformed IWM with an annualized return of 13.46%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively lower 11.88% annualized return.
CRQ.NEO
- 1D
- 1.11%
- 1M
- 4.70%
- YTD
- 17.22%
- 6M
- 20.22%
- 1Y
- 44.45%
- 3Y*
- 26.75%
- 5Y*
- 17.85%
- 10Y*
- 13.46%
IWM
- 1D
- 1.61%
- 1M
- 5.55%
- YTD
- 20.47%
- 6M
- 16.16%
- 1Y
- 44.01%
- 3Y*
- 20.36%
- 5Y*
- 9.49%
- 10Y*
- 11.88%
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CRQ.NEO iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF | 17.22% | 31.87% | 22.17% | 9.76% | 0.89% | 33.95% | -2.73% | 19.66% | -10.18% | 6.98% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 20.47% | 7.49% | 20.95% | 14.25% | -14.82% | 13.50% | 18.00% | 19.23% | -3.58% | 7.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRQ.NEO and IWM is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2009 | 0.52 |
The correlation between CRQ.NEO and IWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.53 (3 years), 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
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
CRQ.NEO
IWM
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF (CRQ.NEO) 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.
| CRQ.NEO | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.03 | 1.39 | +0.64 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.53 | 4.21 | +2.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 31.92 | 13.85 | +18.07 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CRQ.NEO | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.55 | 2.36 | +2.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.45 | 0.47 | +0.98 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.83 | 0.57 | +0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.69 | 0.71 | -0.01 |
Drawdowns
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRQ.NEO drawdown since its inception was -41.75%, which is greater than IWM's maximum drawdown of -35.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRQ.NEO and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRQ.NEO | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.75% | -35.30% | -6.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.84% | -10.49% | +3.65% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.70% | -26.17% | +14.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.82% | -29.15% | +13.33% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.75% | -35.30% | -6.45% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.62% | -6.79% | +1.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.40% | 3.19% | -1.79% |
Volatility
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF (CRQ.NEO) is 3.13%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.48%. This indicates that CRQ.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRQ.NEO | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.13% | 5.48% | -2.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.07% | 13.39% | -5.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.81% | 18.72% | -8.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.42% | 20.32% | -7.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.27% | 21.01% | -4.74% |
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRQ.NEO has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRQ.NEO vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
CRQ.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, more than IWM's 0.87% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CRQ.NEO iShares Canadian Fundamental Index ETF | 1.87% | 2.18% | 2.72% | 2.97% | 2.90% | 2.17% | 2.98% | 2.71% | 2.46% | 1.91% | 1.89% | 3.09% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.87% | 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
CRQ.NEO and IWM have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for CRQ.NEO.
CRQ.NEO is categorized as Canada Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. CRQ.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Canada Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for CRQ.NEO and 0.19% for IWM.
Find the right allocation for CRQ.NEO and IWM
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