PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EAOA vs. IWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EAOA vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF (EAOA) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EAOA achieves a 9.93% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.


EAOA

1D
-0.71%
1M
4.36%
YTD
9.93%
6M
10.44%
1Y
24.37%
3Y*
17.20%
5Y*
8.52%
10Y*

IWM

1D
-1.37%
1M
3.52%
YTD
17.07%
6M
15.83%
1Y
39.10%
3Y*
17.88%
5Y*
6.11%
10Y*
10.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EAOA vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
EAOA
iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF
9.93%18.41%13.79%18.27%-17.76%14.52%19.79%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
17.07%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%39.30%

Correlation

The correlation between EAOA and IWM is 0.82, 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

0.82

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

0.82

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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 19, 2020

0.84

The correlation between EAOA and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

EAOA vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EAOA
IWM

Technology

28.9%
19.5%

Financial Services

13.5%
15.8%

Industrials

9.0%
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

7.7%
7.8%

Communication Services

7.3%
2.0%

Healthcare

6.8%
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
2.1%

Energy

3.0%
6.0%

Basic Materials

2.4%
4.5%

Utilities

2.3%
3.0%

Real Estate

1.6%
5.7%

Technology

EAOA
28.9%
IWM
19.5%

Financial Services

EAOA
13.5%
IWM
15.8%

Industrials

EAOA
9.0%
IWM
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

EAOA
7.7%
IWM
7.8%

Communication Services

EAOA
7.3%
IWM
2.0%

Healthcare

EAOA
6.8%
IWM
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

EAOA
3.7%
IWM
2.1%

Energy

EAOA
3.0%
IWM
6.0%

Basic Materials

EAOA
2.4%
IWM
4.5%

Utilities

EAOA
2.3%
IWM
3.0%

Real Estate

EAOA
1.6%
IWM
5.7%

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

EAOA vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EAOA
EAOA Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
EAOA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EAOA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
EAOA Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
EAOA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
EAOA Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

EAOA vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF (EAOA) 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.


EAOAIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.36

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.34

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.00

3.56

-0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.30

12.64

+0.66

EAOA vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAOA Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAOA and IWM, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EAOAIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.28

2.05

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.27

+0.37

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.93

0.37

+0.56

Drawdowns

EAOA vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAOA drawdown since its inception was -25.06%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAOA and IWM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EAOAIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.06%

-59.05%

+33.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.17%

-11.03%

+2.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.84%

-27.50%

+13.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.06%

-31.91%

+6.85%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.71%

-1.49%

+0.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.31%

-10.77%

+5.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.84%

3.10%

-1.26%

Volatility

EAOA vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF (EAOA) is 3.39%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that EAOA 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


EAOAIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.39%

5.75%

-2.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.64%

13.53%

-4.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.75%

19.20%

-8.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.25%

22.52%

-9.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.14%

23.04%

-9.90%

EAOA vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EAOA has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

EAOA vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

EAOA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.95%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EAOA
iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF
1.95%2.10%2.09%2.21%1.93%1.48%1.12%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
0.88%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


EAOA and IWM have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to EAOA (3.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAOA dropped -25.06% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 5-year performance, EAOA leads with 8.52% vs 6.11% for IWM. On fees, EAOA is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, EAOA has been the lower-risk option at 3.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EAOA has performed better with a 8.52% return vs 6.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EAOA is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

EAOA has the higher dividend yield at 1.95%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

EAOA is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. EAOA tracks BlackRock ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EAOA and 0.19% for IWM.

EAOA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 2.05), 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 EAOA 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