ENHI vs. IWM
ENHI (iShares Enhanced International Active ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ENHI is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by iShares, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. ENHI is actively managed, while IWM is passively managed. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ENHI charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
ENHI vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ENHI
- 1D
- -0.54%
- 1M
- 2.09%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
IWM
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- -2.14%
- 6M
- 12.62%
- YTD
- 18.79%
- 1Y
- 36.90%
- 3Y*
- 15.11%
- 5Y*
- 6.99%
- 10Y*
- 10.70%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.73%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $2.84K | $460.27K | $161.82K | |
| $6.67B | $6.32B | $7.45B |
ENHI vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ENHI iShares Enhanced International Active ETF | 11.65% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 15.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between ENHI and IWM is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 12, 2026 | 0.73 |
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
ENHI vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
ENHI
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IWM
ENHI vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Enhanced International Active ETF (ENHI) 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ENHI | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.11 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 11.02 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ENHI vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ENHI drawdown since its inception was -5.63%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENHI and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ENHI | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.63% | -59.05% | +53.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -11.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -27.50% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -31.91% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.54% | -3.08% | +2.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.35% | -10.71% | +9.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.11% | — |
Volatility
ENHI vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ENHI | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.82% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 14.12% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.45% | 19.41% | +1.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.45% | 22.48% | -2.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.45% | 23.01% | -2.56% |
ENHI vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
ENHI has a 0.27% 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
ENHI vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
ENHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, more than IWM's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENHI iShares Enhanced International Active ETF | 1.17% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.91% | 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
ENHI and IWM have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for ENHI.
ENHI has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 0.91% for IWM.
ENHI is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for ENHI and 0.19% for IWM.
Find the right allocation for ENHI 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