IBII vs. IWM
IBII (iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBII is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2032 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBII returned 5.28% vs 41.60% for IWM. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBII charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
IBII vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBII achieves a 1.63% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 18.84% return.
IBII
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- -0.38%
- YTD
- 1.63%
- 6M
- 1.21%
- 1Y
- 5.28%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWM
- 1D
- 1.51%
- 1M
- 3.34%
- YTD
- 18.84%
- 6M
- 16.56%
- 1Y
- 41.60%
- 3Y*
- 19.00%
- 5Y*
- 6.43%
- 10Y*
- 10.97%
IBII vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
IBII iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF | 1.63% | 8.65% | 1.21% | 4.85% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 18.84% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 14.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBII and IWM is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023 | 0.18 |
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
IBII vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
IBII
IWM
IBII vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF (IBII) 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.
| IBII | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.36 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.68 | 3.79 | -1.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.32 | 13.45 | -4.13 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IBII | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.56 | 2.18 | -0.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.29 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.12 | 0.37 | +0.75 |
Drawdowns
IBII vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBII drawdown since its inception was -4.65%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBII and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBII | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.65% | -59.05% | +54.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.98% | -11.03% | +9.05% |
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 | -0.65% | -0.01% | -0.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.12% | -10.77% | +9.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.58% | 3.10% | -2.52% |
Volatility
IBII vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF (IBII) is 0.89%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.70%. This indicates that IBII 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
| IBII | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.89% | 5.70% | -4.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.29% | 13.60% | -11.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.42% | 19.19% | -15.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.42% | 22.53% | -17.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.42% | 23.04% | -17.62% |
IBII vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBII has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IBII vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
IBII's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.05%, more than IWM's 0.87% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBII iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF | 4.05% | 4.80% | 4.76% | 1.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.87% | 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
IBII and IWM have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWM has higher volatility (5.70%) compared to IBII (0.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBII dropped -4.65% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 1-year performance, IWM leads with 41.60% vs 5.28% for IBII. On fees, IBII is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBII has been the lower-risk option at 0.89%. 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 41.60% return vs 5.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBII is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.
IBII has the higher dividend yield at 4.05%, compared with 0.87% for IWM.
IBII is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IBII tracks ICE 2032 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBII and 0.19% for IWM.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.56), 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 IBII 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