EMIF vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMIF (iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMIF is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMIF returned 2.36%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMIF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

EMIF vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMIF achieves a 1.74% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return. Over the past 10 years, EMIF has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 2.36%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.93% annualized return.

EMIF

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -6.56%
• YTD: 1.74%
• 6M: 0.79%
• 1Y: 21.17%
• 3Y*: 11.48%
• 5Y*: 4.93%
• 10Y*: 2.36%

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)

EMIF vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF	1.74%	33.90%	1.21%	5.67%	-12.59%	3.76%	-19.98%	16.36%	-13.70%	20.70%
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 EMIF and IWM is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.42
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2009	0.53

The correlation between EMIF and IWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (3 years) to 0.53 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMIF vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMIF	IWM
Industrials	41.1%	17.1%
Utilities	40.1%	3.0%
Energy	18.8%	6.0%
Basic Materials	-	4.5%
Communication Services	-	2.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	7.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.1%
Financial Services	-	15.8%
Healthcare	-	15.8%
Real Estate	-	5.7%
Technology	-	19.5%

Return for Risk

EMIF vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMIF

EMIF Risk / Return Rank: 37
EMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
EMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
EMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 39
EMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
EMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 33

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 62
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

EMIF vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) 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.

	EMIF	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.38	2.05	-0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.00	2.85	-0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.34	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.71	3.56	-1.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.92	12.64	-7.72
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMIF vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is lower than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMIF 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMIF	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.38	2.05	-0.67
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25	0.27	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.12	0.48	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.17	0.37	-0.20

Drawdowns

EMIF vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMIF drawdown since its inception was -48.02%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMIF and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMIF	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.02%	-59.05%	+11.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.45%	-11.03%	-1.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.70%	-27.50%	+10.80%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.68%	-31.91%	+8.23%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.02%	-41.13%	-6.89%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.45%	-1.49%	-10.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.91%	-10.77%	-5.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.31%	3.10%	+1.21%

Volatility

EMIF vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) is 4.38%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that EMIF 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.

Volatility by Period

	EMIF	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.38%	5.75%	-1.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.97%	13.53%	-0.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.41%	19.20%	-3.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.67%	22.52%	-2.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.61%	23.04%	-2.43%

EMIF vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMIF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMIF vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

EMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.87%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF	4.87%	4.96%	4.12%	2.64%	3.08%	3.94%	2.54%	2.07%	2.64%	2.58%	3.16%	2.07%
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

Can I hold both EMIF and IWM in my portfolio?

EMIF and IWM have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMIF or IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to EMIF (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMIF dropped -48.02% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, EMIF or IWM?

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.93% vs 2.36% for EMIF. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, EMIF has been the lower-risk option at 4.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMIF or IWM?

Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.93% return vs 2.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMIF or IWM?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMIF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMIF or IWM?

EMIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.87%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

What is the main difference between EMIF and IWM?

EMIF is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. EMIF tracks S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMIF and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.38), 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.