PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESML vs. CWS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESML vs. CWS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF (ESML) and AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESML achieves a 17.35% return, which is significantly higher than CWS's 3.94% return.


ESML

1D
-0.17%
1M
-2.10%
6M
11.46%
YTD
17.35%
1Y
31.31%
3Y*
14.39%
5Y*
7.63%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
10.66%

CWS

1D
1.57%
1M
3.96%
6M
4.04%
YTD
3.94%
1Y
5.20%
3Y*
8.97%
5Y*
8.61%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
11.72%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$260.10K$341.02K$716.43K
$4.23M$5.41M$10.96M

ESML vs. CWS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
ESML
iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF
17.35%10.62%12.01%17.27%-17.28%19.28%19.56%29.12%-10.72%
CWS
AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF
3.94%6.43%9.82%25.06%-10.42%22.20%17.12%30.97%-4.58%

Correlation

The correlation between ESML and CWS is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.71

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.78

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2018

0.73

The correlation between ESML and CWS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

ESML vs. CWS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ESML
CWS

Technology

21.1%
19.0%

Industrials

17.7%
24.0%

Healthcare

13.8%
26.7%

Financial Services

13.6%
11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

10.8%
10.6%

Real Estate

6.5%

-

Energy

4.4%

-

Basic Materials

3.6%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.4%
4.3%

Utilities

2.6%
4.1%

Communication Services

2.4%

-

Technology

ESML
21.1%
CWS
19.0%

Industrials

ESML
17.7%
CWS
24.0%

Healthcare

ESML
13.8%
CWS
26.7%

Financial Services

ESML
13.6%
CWS
11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

ESML
10.8%
CWS
10.6%

Real Estate

ESML
6.5%
CWS

-

Energy

ESML
4.4%
CWS

-

Basic Materials

ESML
3.6%
CWS

-

Consumer Defensive

ESML
3.4%
CWS
4.3%

Utilities

ESML
2.6%
CWS
4.1%

Communication Services

ESML
2.4%
CWS

-

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

ESML vs. CWS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ESML
ESML Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
ESML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESML Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESML Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
ESML Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESML Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

CWS
CWS Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
CWS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWS Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
CWS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWS Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ESML vs. CWS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF (ESML) and AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS). 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.


ESMLCWSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.07

+0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.24

0.39

+2.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.36

0.98

+10.38

ESML vs. CWS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESML Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher than the CWS Sharpe Ratio of 0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESML and CWS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ESML vs. CWS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESML drawdown since its inception was -41.97%, which is greater than CWS's maximum drawdown of -33.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESML and CWS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESMLCWSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.97%

-33.82%

-8.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.04%

-11.92%

+2.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.68%

-16.56%

-10.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.61%

-24.87%

-3.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.95%

-0.73%

-3.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.83%

-4.54%

-4.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.58%

4.69%

-2.11%

Volatility

ESML vs. CWS - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF (ESML) has a higher volatility of 3.85% compared to AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) at 3.48%. This indicates that ESML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CWS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ESMLCWSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.85%

3.48%

+0.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.35%

10.32%

+2.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.16%

13.54%

+3.62%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.20%

15.69%

+5.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.29%

16.84%

+6.45%

ESML vs. CWS - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESML has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than CWS's 0.77% expense ratio.


Dividends

ESML vs. CWS - Dividend Comparison

ESML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, more than CWS's 0.29% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CWS
AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF
0.29%0.31%0.59%0.25%0.50%0.16%0.27%0.39%2.07%0.29%0.03%
ESML
iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA Small-Cap ETF
0.92%1.08%1.22%1.31%1.46%0.94%0.99%1.10%1.07%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ESML and CWS have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ESML has higher volatility (3.85%) compared to CWS (3.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ESML dropped -41.97% vs CWS's -33.82%.

On 5-year performance, CWS leads with 8.61% vs 7.63% for ESML. On fees, ESML is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, CWS has been the lower-risk option at 3.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, CWS has performed better with a 8.61% return vs 7.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ESML is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for CWS.

ESML has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.29% for CWS.

ESML is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while CWS is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and AdvisorShares. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for ESML and 0.77% for CWS.

ESML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 0.34), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ESML and CWS

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