ICLN vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ICLN returned 11.99%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ICLN charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

ICLN vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICLN achieves a 40.54% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 17.07% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has outperformed IWM with an annualized return of 11.99%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively lower 10.93% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: -2.78%
• 1M: 11.22%
• YTD: 40.54%
• 6M: 39.84%
• 1Y: 83.73%
• 3Y*: 8.92%
• 5Y*: 2.10%
• 10Y*: 11.99%

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)

ICLN vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	40.54%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-20.48%	14.54%	20.03%	25.39%	-11.12%	14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and IWM is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2008	0.64

The correlation between ICLN and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

ICLN vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLN	IWM
Utilities	32.8%	3.0%
Industrials	27.8%	17.1%
Energy	26.4%	6.0%
Technology	11.1%	19.5%
Basic Materials	1.1%	4.5%
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	7.8%
Communication Services	-	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.1%
Financial Services	-	15.8%
Healthcare	-	15.8%
Real Estate	-	5.7%

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 87
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 78
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 90

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 62
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

ICLN vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) 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.

	ICLN	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.20	2.05	+1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.86	2.85	+1.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.34	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.50	3.56	+3.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.35	12.64	+8.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ICLN vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 3.20, which is higher than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ICLN	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.20	2.05	+1.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.08	0.27	-0.20
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.44	0.48	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.08	0.37	-0.44

Drawdowns

ICLN vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, which is greater than IWM's maximum drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-59.05%	-28.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.22%	-11.03%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.18%	-27.50%	-15.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.16%	-31.91%	-25.25%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.75%	-41.13%	-25.62%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.13%	-1.49%	-35.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.61%	-10.77%	-55.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.94%	3.10%	+0.84%

Volatility

ICLN vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a higher volatility of 9.53% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 5.75%. This indicates that ICLN'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.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.53%	5.75%	+3.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.21%	13.53%	+6.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.38%	19.20%	+7.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.21%	22.52%	+4.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.20%	23.04%	+4.16%

ICLN vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICLN vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.16%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%
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

Can I hold both ICLN and IWM in my portfolio?

ICLN and IWM have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ICLN or IWM?

ICLN has higher volatility (9.53%) compared to IWM (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, ICLN or IWM?

On 10-year performance, ICLN leads with 11.99% vs 10.93% for IWM. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 5.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ICLN or IWM?

Over the 10-year period, ICLN has performed better with a 11.99% return vs 10.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICLN or IWM?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for ICLN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ICLN or IWM?

ICLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

What is the main difference between ICLN and IWM?

ICLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for ICLN and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.20 vs 2.05), 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.