GSG vs. IWM
GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GSG returned 8.24%/yr vs 10.63%/yr for IWM. Their 0.29 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GSG charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
GSG vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GSG achieves a 35.21% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 20.84% return. Over the past 10 years, GSG has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 8.24%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.63% annualized return.
GSG
- 1D
- -2.68%
- 1M
- 9.90%
- 6M
- 27.47%
- YTD
- 35.21%
- 1Y
- 38.52%
- 3Y*
- 13.26%
- 5Y*
- 14.69%
- 10Y*
- 8.24%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.27%
IWM
- 1D
- 1.72%
- 1M
- -0.46%
- 6M
- 13.45%
- YTD
- 20.84%
- 1Y
- 39.26%
- 3Y*
- 16.48%
- 5Y*
- 7.64%
- 10Y*
- 10.63%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.80%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $17.98M | $16.40M | $25.53M | |
| $6.77B | $6.36B | $7.44B |
GSG vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 35.21% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -5.51% | 24.08% | 38.77% | -23.94% | 15.62% | -13.88% | 3.89% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 20.84% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -11.12% | 14.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between GSG and IWM is -0.21, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.21 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.15 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 21, 2006 | 0.29 |
The correlation between GSG and IWM shifts across timeframes, from -0.21 (1 year) to 0.29 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
GSG vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
GSG
IWM
GSG vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) 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.
| GSG | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.34 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.06 | 3.58 | -1.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.61 | 12.68 | -6.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GSG vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GSG drawdown since its inception was -89.62%, which is greater than IWM's maximum drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSG and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GSG | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.62% | -59.05% | -30.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.81% | -11.03% | -7.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.81% | -27.50% | +8.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.12% | -31.91% | +2.79% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.64% | -41.13% | -16.51% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -59.18% | -1.41% | -57.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -63.67% | -10.71% | -52.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.85% | 3.11% | +2.74% |
Volatility
GSG vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a higher volatility of 8.75% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 4.21%. This indicates that GSG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GSG | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.75% | 4.21% | +4.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.27% | 14.13% | +8.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.37% | 19.36% | +5.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.89% | 22.50% | +0.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.07% | 23.02% | -0.95% |
GSG vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GSG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
GSG vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 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 | 0.90% | 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
GSG and IWM have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (8.75%) compared to IWM (4.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSG dropped -89.62% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.63% vs 8.24% for GSG. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 4.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.63% return vs 8.24%. 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 0.75% for GSG.
IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
GSG is categorized as Commodities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GSG and 0.19% for IWM.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.59), 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.
Find the right allocation for GSG 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