CWO.NEO vs. IWM

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM).

CWO.NEO and IWM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CWO.NEO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index. It was launched on Apr 7, 2009. IWM is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 Index. It was launched on May 22, 2000. Both CWO.NEO and IWM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF	4.72%	26.34%	22.33%	9.56%	-9.03%	7.13%	-3.12%	10.86%	-0.29%	17.16%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	2.85%	7.49%	20.95%	14.25%	-14.82%	13.50%	18.00%	19.23%	-3.58%	7.29%

Different Trading Currencies

CWO.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, CWO.NEO achieves a 4.72% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 2.85% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CWO.NEO having a 10.26% annualized return and IWM not far ahead at 10.55%.

CWO.NEO

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -3.79%
• YTD: 4.72%
• 6M: 6.75%
• 1Y: 24.14%
• 3Y*: 19.80%
• 5Y*: 10.38%
• 10Y*: 10.26%

IWM

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: -3.69%
• YTD: 2.85%
• 6M: 3.15%
• 1Y: 22.84%
• 3Y*: 14.23%
• 5Y*: 5.61%
• 10Y*: 10.55%

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

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWO.NEO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

CWO.NEO

iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF

IWM

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Return for Risk

CWO.NEO vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWO.NEO

CWO.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 66
CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CWO.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
CWO.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 71
CWO.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
CWO.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 59

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 65
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 56
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.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.

	CWO.NEO	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.32	1.00	+0.33
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	1.47	+0.37
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.19	+0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.72	1.63	+0.09
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	6.53	5.26	+1.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 1.32, which is higher than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWO.NEO and IWM, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CWO.NEO	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.32	1.00	+0.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63	0.28	+0.35
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59	0.50	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.65	-0.22

Correlation

The correlation between CWO.NEO and IWM is 0.40, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

CWO.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.66%, more than IWM's 1.02% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF	2.66%	2.79%	3.50%	4.14%	5.03%	4.61%	2.64%	3.01%	3.22%	2.60%	2.57%	3.23%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	1.02%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%

Drawdowns

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWO.NEO drawdown since its inception was -31.99%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -35.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWO.NEO and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWO.NEO	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.99%	-59.05%	+27.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.53%	-13.74%	+0.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.80%	-31.91%	+7.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.97%	-41.13%	+9.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.63%	-7.33%	+0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.37%	-10.83%	+0.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.58%	3.73%	-0.15%

Volatility

CWO.NEO vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) have volatilities of 7.45% and 7.42%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWO.NEO	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.45%	7.42%	+0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.47%	14.53%	-2.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.33%	23.05%	-4.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.57%	20.32%	-3.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.54%	20.98%	-3.44%