ECML vs. IWN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ECML (EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF) and IWN (iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. ECML is actively managed, while IWN is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ECML returned 15.57%/yr vs 17.66%/yr for IWN. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ECML charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.24%/yr for IWN.

Performance

ECML vs. IWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECML achieves a 14.39% return, which is significantly lower than IWN's 17.42% return.

ECML

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 1.49%
• YTD: 14.39%
• 6M: 14.23%
• 1Y: 26.84%
• 3Y*: 15.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IWN

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: 2.73%
• YTD: 17.42%
• 6M: 16.54%
• 1Y: 41.15%
• 3Y*: 17.66%
• 5Y*: 6.48%
• 10Y*: 10.16%

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

ECML vs. IWN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	14.39%	6.82%	2.37%	24.36%
IWN iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF	17.42%	12.40%	7.63%	17.81%

Correlation

The correlation between ECML and IWN is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 19, 2023	0.87

The correlation between ECML and IWN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECML vs. IWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ECML	IWN
Consumer Cyclical	23.8%	8.7%
Healthcare	16.6%	8.8%
Industrials	14.2%	11.1%
Energy	13.2%	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	12.4%	2.0%
Basic Materials	10.6%	5.4%
Technology	5.3%	12.4%
Communication Services	3.9%	1.6%
Utilities	1.4%	5.7%
Financial Services	-	24.2%
Real Estate	-	10.2%

Return for Risk

ECML vs. IWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECML

ECML Risk / Return Rank: 61
ECML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
ECML Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
ECML Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ECML Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
ECML Martin Ratio Rank: 62

IWN

IWN Risk / Return Rank: 74
IWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
IWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
IWN Omega Ratio Rank: 64
IWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
IWN Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

ECML vs. IWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN). 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.

	ECML	IWN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	2.33	-0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	3.28	-0.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.40	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.85	4.89	-1.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.05	16.44	-5.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ECML vs. IWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECML Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the IWN Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECML and IWN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ECML	IWN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.86	2.33	-0.47
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.30	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.44	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.86	0.39	+0.47

Drawdowns

ECML vs. IWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECML drawdown since its inception was -24.66%, smaller than the maximum IWN drawdown of -61.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECML and IWN.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECML	IWN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.66%	-61.55%	+36.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	-8.45%	+1.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.66%	-26.70%	+2.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.70%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.08%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.27%	-1.47%	+1.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.88%	-10.16%	+4.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.44%	2.51%	-0.07%

Volatility

ECML vs. IWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) is 3.84%, while iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) has a volatility of 4.91%. This indicates that ECML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ECML	IWN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.84%	4.91%	-1.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.75%	11.86%	-2.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.56%	17.81%	-3.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.39%	21.43%	-3.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.39%	23.39%	-5.00%

ECML vs. IWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IWN's 0.24% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECML vs. IWN - Dividend Comparison

ECML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, less than IWN's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	1.20%	1.38%	0.98%	0.77%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWN iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF	1.46%	1.70%	1.80%	2.04%	2.12%	1.48%	1.60%	1.92%	1.99%	1.78%	1.74%	2.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECML and IWN in my portfolio?

ECML and IWN have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ECML or IWN?

IWN has higher volatility (4.91%) compared to ECML (3.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECML dropped -24.66% vs IWN's -61.55%.

Which ETF is better, ECML or IWN?

On 3-year performance, IWN leads with 17.66% vs 15.57% for ECML. On fees, IWN is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, ECML has been the lower-risk option at 3.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ECML or IWN?

Over the 3-year period, IWN has performed better with a 17.66% return vs 15.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECML or IWN?

IWN is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ECML.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ECML or IWN?

IWN has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 1.20% for ECML.

What is the main difference between ECML and IWN?

They also come from different issuers: Euclidean and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ECML and 0.24% for IWN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.86), 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.