EEMV vs. IWM
EEMV (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMV is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EEMV returned 6.68%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEMV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
EEMV vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with EEMV having a 17.74% return and IWM slightly lower at 17.07%. Over the past 10 years, EEMV has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 6.68%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.93% annualized return.
EEMV
- 1D
- -1.04%
- 1M
- 7.00%
- YTD
- 17.74%
- 6M
- 18.90%
- 1Y
- 26.57%
- 3Y*
- 14.14%
- 5Y*
- 5.59%
- 10Y*
- 6.68%
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%
EEMV vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF | 17.74% | 13.45% | 7.98% | 7.75% | -13.94% | 5.05% | 6.90% | 7.83% | -5.81% | 27.28% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 17.07% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -11.12% | 14.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between EEMV and IWM is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2011 | 0.60 |
The correlation between EEMV and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.
EEMV vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EEMV
IWM
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
EEMV
IWM
Financial Services
EEMV
IWM
Communication Services
EEMV
IWM
Consumer Defensive
EEMV
IWM
Industrials
EEMV
IWM
Healthcare
EEMV
IWM
Consumer Cyclical
EEMV
IWM
Utilities
EEMV
IWM
Energy
EEMV
IWM
Basic Materials
EEMV
IWM
Real Estate
EEMV
IWM
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
EEMV vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
EEMV
IWM
EEMV vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) 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.
| EEMV | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.04 | 2.05 | -0.01 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.89 | 2.85 | +0.04 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.34 | +0.07 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.89 | 3.56 | -0.67 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.79 | 12.64 | -1.85 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EEMV | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.04 | 2.05 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 | 0.27 | +0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.48 | 0.48 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 0.37 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
EEMV vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEMV drawdown since its inception was -31.56%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMV and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EEMV | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.56% | -59.05% | +27.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.22% | -11.03% | +1.81% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.47% | -27.50% | +15.03% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.90% | -31.91% | +10.01% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.56% | -41.13% | +9.57% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.08% | -1.49% | +0.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.97% | -10.77% | +2.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.47% | 3.10% | -0.63% |
Volatility
EEMV vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) have volatilities of 5.78% and 5.75%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EEMV | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.78% | 5.75% | +0.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.71% | 13.53% | -1.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.06% | 19.20% | -6.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.85% | 22.52% | -10.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.86% | 23.04% | -9.18% |
EEMV vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EEMV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% 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
EEMV vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
EEMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF | 2.25% | 2.65% | 3.50% | 2.75% | 1.93% | 2.14% | 2.45% | 2.63% | 2.46% | 2.34% | 2.79% | 2.55% |
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
EEMV and IWM have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EEMV has higher volatility (5.78%) compared to IWM (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMV dropped -31.56% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.93% vs 6.68% for EEMV. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.93% return vs 6.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EEMV.
EEMV has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.
EEMV is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. EEMV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EEMV and 0.19% for IWM.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 2.04), 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.
Find the right allocation for EEMV 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