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

Performance

IBHJ vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ) 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, IBHJ achieves a 1.50% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.


IBHJ

1D
-0.34%
1M
0.50%
YTD
1.50%
6M
2.06%
1Y
7.29%
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)

IBHJ vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
IBHJ
iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF
1.50%9.28%7.32%8.37%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
17.07%12.66%11.38%12.08%

Correlation

The correlation between IBHJ and IWM is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2023

0.66

The correlation between IBHJ and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

IBHJ vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBHJ
IBHJ Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
IBHJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBHJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBHJ Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
IBHJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBHJ Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

IBHJ vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ) 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.


IBHJIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.34

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.98

3.56

-0.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.41

12.64

+0.77

IBHJ vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBHJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.80, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBHJ 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


IBHJIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.80

2.05

-0.25

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

1.53

0.37

+1.16

Drawdowns

IBHJ vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBHJ drawdown since its inception was -4.93%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBHJ and IWM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBHJIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.93%

-59.05%

+54.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.46%

-11.03%

+8.57%

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

-0.39%

-1.49%

+1.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.62%

-10.77%

+10.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.54%

3.10%

-2.56%

Volatility

IBHJ vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ) is 1.09%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that IBHJ 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


IBHJIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.09%

5.75%

-4.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.20%

13.53%

-10.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.07%

19.20%

-15.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.95%

22.52%

-16.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.95%

23.04%

-17.09%

IBHJ vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

IBHJ vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IBHJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.68%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IBHJ
iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF
6.68%6.64%6.87%3.66%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


IBHJ and IWM have a correlation of 0.68, 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 IBHJ (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBHJ dropped -4.93% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 1-year performance, IWM leads with 39.10% vs 7.29% for IBHJ. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IBHJ has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. 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 7.29%. 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 IBHJ.

IBHJ has the higher dividend yield at 6.68%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

IBHJ is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IBHJ tracks Bloomberg 2030 Term High Yield and Income Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for IBHJ and 0.19% for IWM.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.80), 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 IBHJ 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