EFG vs. IWP

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EFG (iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF) and IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EFG is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Growth Index, while IWP is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EFG returned 8.02%/yr vs 12.43%/yr for IWP. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EFG charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for IWP.

Performance

EFG vs. IWP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) 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, EFG achieves a 8.93% return, which is significantly higher than IWP's 4.59% return. Over the past 10 years, EFG has underperformed IWP with an annualized return of 8.02%, while IWP has yielded a comparatively higher 12.43% annualized return.

EFG

• 1D: 0.94%
• 1M: 3.79%
• YTD: 8.93%
• 6M: 9.83%
• 1Y: 14.70%
• 3Y*: 11.46%
• 5Y*: 4.43%
• 10Y*: 8.02%

IWP

• 1D: 0.80%
• 1M: 4.11%
• YTD: 4.59%
• 6M: 3.03%
• 1Y: 6.41%
• 3Y*: 16.22%
• 5Y*: 6.76%
• 10Y*: 12.43%

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

EFG vs. IWP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF	8.93%	20.70%	1.53%	17.55%	-23.12%	11.01%	17.85%	27.47%	-12.93%	28.86%
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	4.59%	8.45%	21.86%	25.70%	-26.90%	12.60%	35.25%	35.04%	-4.89%	24.93%

Correlation

The correlation between EFG and IWP is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 8, 2005	0.77

The correlation between EFG and IWP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

EFG vs. IWP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EFG	IWP
Industrials	29.6%	24.2%
Technology	18.1%	20.0%
Healthcare	14.2%	13.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	21.1%
Financial Services	10.6%	6.9%
Consumer Defensive	5.1%	1.5%
Communication Services	4.8%	4.2%
Basic Materials	4.6%	0.4%
Utilities	1.1%	2.9%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.4%
Energy	0.2%	3.8%

Return for Risk

EFG vs. IWP — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFG

EFG Risk / Return Rank: 26
EFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
EFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
EFG Omega Ratio Rank: 24
EFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
EFG Martin Ratio Rank: 30

IWP

IWP Risk / Return Rank: 15
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 14
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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.

EFG vs. IWP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) 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.

	EFG	IWP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.86	0.39	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.34	0.67	+0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.08	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.15	0.44	+0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.26	1.27	+2.99
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EFG vs. IWP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is higher than the IWP Sharpe Ratio of 0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFG 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EFG	IWP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86	0.39	+0.47
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25	0.30	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45	0.58	-0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.29	0.43	-0.13

Drawdowns

EFG vs. IWP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFG drawdown since its inception was -58.40%, roughly equal to the maximum IWP drawdown of -56.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFG and IWP.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFG	IWP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.40%	-56.92%	-1.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.78%	-14.79%	+2.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	-25.20%	+8.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.78%	-38.62%	+2.84%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.78%	-38.62%	+2.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.32%	+1.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.15%	-9.68%	-2.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	5.06%	-1.60%

Volatility

EFG vs. IWP - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) has a higher volatility of 5.72% compared to iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) at 3.73%. This indicates that EFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFG	IWP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.72%	3.73%	+1.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.38%	12.64%	+1.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.08%	16.48%	+0.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.11%	22.30%	-4.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.69%	21.67%	-3.98%

EFG vs. IWP - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IWP's 0.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFG vs. IWP - Dividend Comparison

EFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.32%, more than IWP's 0.32% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF	2.32%	2.53%	1.64%	1.63%	1.27%	1.54%	0.85%	1.69%	1.98%	1.56%	2.20%	1.75%
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.32%	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 EFG and IWP in my portfolio?

EFG and IWP have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EFG or IWP?

EFG has higher volatility (5.72%) compared to IWP (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFG dropped -58.40% vs IWP's -56.92%.

Which ETF is better, EFG or IWP?

On 10-year performance, IWP leads with 12.43% vs 8.02% for EFG. On fees, IWP is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, IWP has been the lower-risk option at 3.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EFG or IWP?

Over the 10-year period, IWP has performed better with a 12.43% return vs 8.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFG or IWP?

IWP is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EFG.

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

EFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.32%, compared with 0.32% for IWP.

What is the main difference between EFG and IWP?

EFG is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while IWP is Mid Cap Growth Equities. EFG tracks MSCI EAFE Growth Index, while IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for EFG and 0.23% for IWP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.86 vs 0.39), 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.