DFIV vs. IWP

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

DFIV (Dimensional International Value ETF) and IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFIV is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional, while IWP is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Growth Index. DFIV is actively managed, while IWP is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFIV returned 23.38%/yr vs 14.57%/yr for IWP. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DFIV charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for IWP.

Performance

DFIV vs. IWP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFIV achieves a 12.20% return, which is significantly higher than IWP's 2.86% return.

DFIV

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 12.20%
• 6M: 13.92%
• 1Y: 33.45%
• 3Y*: 23.38%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IWP

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 3.23%
• YTD: 2.86%
• 6M: 1.29%
• 1Y: 4.54%
• 3Y*: 14.57%
• 5Y*: 5.82%
• 10Y*: 12.47%

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

DFIV vs. IWP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	12.20%	45.36%	7.26%	17.75%	-3.70%	0.50%
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	2.86%	8.45%	21.86%	25.70%	-26.90%	-1.64%

Correlation

The correlation between DFIV and IWP is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2021	0.61

The correlation between DFIV and IWP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFIV vs. IWP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFIV	IWP
Financial Services	32.4%	6.9%
Energy	16.4%	3.8%
Basic Materials	10.9%	0.4%
Industrials	9.6%	24.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	21.1%
Healthcare	4.9%	13.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	1.5%
Communication Services	4.2%	4.2%
Technology	2.8%	20.0%
Utilities	2.5%	2.9%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.4%

Return for Risk

DFIV vs. IWP — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFIV

DFIV Risk / Return Rank: 82
DFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
DFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
DFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
DFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
DFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

IWP

IWP Risk / Return Rank: 13
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

DFIV vs. IWP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) 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.

	DFIV	IWP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	0.27	+2.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.26	0.50	+2.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.06	+0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.48	0.31	+3.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.34	0.89	+12.45

DFIV vs. IWP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFIV Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is higher than the IWP Sharpe Ratio of 0.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFIV 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.

Drawdowns

DFIV vs. IWP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFIV drawdown since its inception was -25.42%, smaller than the maximum IWP drawdown of -56.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFIV and IWP.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFIV	IWP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.42%	-56.92%	+31.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.66%	-14.79%	+5.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.72%	-25.20%	+10.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-38.62%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.62%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.43%	-2.95%	+2.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.46%	-9.68%	+5.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.52%	5.10%	-2.58%

Volatility

DFIV vs. IWP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) is 4.50%, while iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) has a volatility of 5.68%. This indicates that DFIV 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.

Volatility by Period

	DFIV	IWP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.50%	5.68%	-1.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.46%	13.34%	-1.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.10%	17.03%	-2.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.66%	22.37%	-5.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.66%	21.71%	-5.05%

DFIV vs. IWP - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFIV has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is higher than IWP's 0.23% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

DFIV vs. IWP - Dividend Comparison

DFIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, more than IWP's 0.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	2.54%	2.92%	3.88%	3.93%	3.84%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.33%	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

Can I hold both DFIV and IWP in my portfolio?

DFIV and IWP have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFIV or IWP?

IWP has higher volatility (5.68%) compared to DFIV (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFIV dropped -25.42% vs IWP's -56.92%.

Which ETF is better, DFIV or IWP?

On 3-year performance, DFIV leads with 23.38% vs 14.57% for IWP. On fees, IWP is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, DFIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFIV or IWP?

Over the 3-year period, DFIV has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 14.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFIV or IWP?

IWP is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for DFIV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFIV or IWP?

DFIV has the higher dividend yield at 2.54%, compared with 0.33% for IWP.

What is the main difference between DFIV and IWP?

DFIV is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while IWP is Mid Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for DFIV and 0.23% for IWP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 0.27), 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.