DFUV vs. IWD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DFUV (Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF) and IWD (iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. DFUV is actively managed, while IWD is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFUV returned 19.49%/yr vs 18.41%/yr for IWD. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. DFUV charges 0.21%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IWD.

Performance

DFUV vs. IWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF (DFUV) and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFUV achieves a 17.25% return, which is significantly higher than IWD's 15.35% return.

DFUV

• 1D: -1.22%
• 1M: 2.47%
• YTD: 17.25%
• 6M: 16.43%
• 1Y: 32.73%
• 3Y*: 19.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IWD

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: 2.28%
• YTD: 15.35%
• 6M: 14.66%
• 1Y: 28.22%
• 3Y*: 18.41%
• 5Y*: 10.87%
• 10Y*: 11.61%

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

DFUV vs. IWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFUV Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF	17.25%	15.77%	11.79%	13.25%	-0.71%
IWD iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF	15.35%	15.68%	14.17%	11.34%	-2.10%

Correlation

The correlation between DFUV and IWD is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022	0.97

The correlation between DFUV and IWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFUV vs. IWD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFUV	IWD
Financial Services	21.6%	18.4%
Technology	16.5%	18.6%
Healthcare	14.0%	10.6%
Industrials	13.5%	12.5%
Energy	11.4%	6.3%
Consumer Cyclical	7.3%	7.1%
Basic Materials	5.9%	3.7%
Communication Services	5.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	6.7%
Real Estate	0.3%	3.9%
Utilities	0.1%	4.0%

Return for Risk

DFUV vs. IWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFUV

DFUV Risk / Return Rank: 88
DFUV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
DFUV Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
DFUV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
DFUV Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
DFUV Martin Ratio Rank: 90

IWD

IWD Risk / Return Rank: 83
IWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
IWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
IWD Omega Ratio Rank: 80
IWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
IWD Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

DFUV vs. IWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF (DFUV) and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD). 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.

	DFUV	IWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.70	2.52	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	3.52	+0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.45	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.48	4.18	+1.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.67	17.32	+2.35

DFUV vs. IWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFUV Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the IWD Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFUV and IWD, 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

DFUV vs. IWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFUV drawdown since its inception was -17.60%, smaller than the maximum IWD drawdown of -60.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFUV and IWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFUV	IWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.60%	-60.10%	+42.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.01%	-6.79%	+0.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.60%	-15.71%	-1.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.04%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.51%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.29%	-1.16%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.61%	-8.64%	+5.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.67%	1.63%	+0.04%

Volatility

DFUV vs. IWD - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF (DFUV) and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD) have volatilities of 4.21% and 4.14%, 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

	DFUV	IWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.21%	4.14%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.92%	8.67%	+0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.18%	11.27%	+0.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.27%	14.84%	+1.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.27%	17.28%	-1.01%

DFUV vs. IWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFUV has a 0.21% expense ratio, which is higher than IWD's 0.18% 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

DFUV vs. IWD - Dividend Comparison

DFUV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, less than IWD's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFUV Dimensional US Marketwide Value ETF	1.35%	1.55%	1.64%	1.72%	1.34%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWD iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF	1.45%	1.69%	1.87%	2.02%	2.15%	1.62%	2.05%	2.45%	2.71%	2.09%	2.25%	2.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFUV and IWD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, DFUV and IWD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, DFUV or IWD?

DFUV has higher volatility (4.21%) compared to IWD (4.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFUV dropped -17.60% vs IWD's -60.10%.

Which ETF is better, DFUV or IWD?

On 3-year performance, DFUV leads with 19.49% vs 18.41% for IWD. On fees, IWD is cheaper at 0.18% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFUV or IWD?

Over the 3-year period, DFUV has performed better with a 19.49% return vs 18.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFUV or IWD?

IWD is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.21% for DFUV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFUV or IWD?

IWD has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 1.35% for DFUV.

What is the main difference between DFUV and IWD?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.21% for DFUV and 0.18% for IWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFUV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.52), 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.