PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GRPZ vs. IWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GRPZ vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF (GRPZ) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GRPZ achieves a 11.59% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.


GRPZ

1D
0.60%
1M
-0.92%
YTD
11.59%
6M
11.26%
1Y
24.87%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

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)

GRPZ vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
GRPZ
Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF
11.59%3.09%4.27%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
17.07%12.66%6.37%

Correlation

The correlation between GRPZ and IWM is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2024

0.90

The correlation between GRPZ and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

GRPZ vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GRPZ
IWM

Financial Services

28.0%
15.8%

Industrials

16.3%
17.1%

Healthcare

14.4%
15.8%

Energy

13.0%
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

12.0%
7.8%

Technology

7.9%
19.5%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
2.1%

Basic Materials

2.2%
4.5%

Communication Services

0.9%
2.0%

Real Estate

-

5.7%

Utilities

-

3.0%

Financial Services

GRPZ
28.0%
IWM
15.8%

Industrials

GRPZ
16.3%
IWM
17.1%

Healthcare

GRPZ
14.4%
IWM
15.8%

Energy

GRPZ
13.0%
IWM
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

GRPZ
12.0%
IWM
7.8%

Technology

GRPZ
7.9%
IWM
19.5%

Consumer Defensive

GRPZ
5.3%
IWM
2.1%

Basic Materials

GRPZ
2.2%
IWM
4.5%

Communication Services

GRPZ
0.9%
IWM
2.0%

Real Estate

GRPZ

-

IWM
5.7%

Utilities

GRPZ

-

IWM
3.0%

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

GRPZ vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

GRPZ
GRPZ Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
GRPZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GRPZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
GRPZ Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
GRPZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
GRPZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GRPZ vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF (GRPZ) 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.


GRPZIWMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.41

2.05

-0.64

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.19

2.85

-0.66

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.34

-0.09

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

3.56

-0.98

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

7.42

12.64

-5.22

GRPZ vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GRPZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is lower than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GRPZ 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GRPZIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.41

2.05

-0.64

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.37

+0.05

Drawdowns

GRPZ vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GRPZ drawdown since its inception was -27.87%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRPZ and IWM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GRPZIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.87%

-59.05%

+31.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.53%

-11.03%

+1.50%

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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.92%

-1.49%

-1.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.01%

-10.77%

+3.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.31%

3.10%

+0.21%

Volatility

GRPZ vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF (GRPZ) is 4.71%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that GRPZ 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GRPZIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.71%

5.75%

-1.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.84%

13.53%

-1.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.69%

19.20%

-1.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.19%

22.52%

-1.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.19%

23.04%

-1.85%

GRPZ vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

GRPZ has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.


Dividends

GRPZ vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

GRPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GRPZ
Invesco S&P Smallcap 600 GARP ETF
0.91%0.97%0.73%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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


GRPZ and IWM have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to GRPZ (4.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GRPZ dropped -27.87% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 1-year performance, IWM leads with 39.10% vs 24.87% for GRPZ. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, GRPZ has been the lower-risk option at 4.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IWM has performed better with a 39.10% return vs 24.87%. 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 0.35% for GRPZ.

GRPZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

GRPZ is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. GRPZ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 GARP Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GRPZ and 0.19% for IWM.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.41), 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 GRPZ 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