PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMCG vs. EZM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMCG vs. EZM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and WisdomTree U.S. MidCap Earnings Fund (EZM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCG achieves a 20.64% return, which is significantly higher than EZM's 11.29% return. Over the past 10 years, IMCG has outperformed EZM with an annualized return of 14.46%, while EZM has yielded a comparatively lower 10.61% annualized return.


IMCG

1D
0.49%
1M
7.37%
YTD
20.64%
6M
18.66%
1Y
23.93%
3Y*
19.24%
5Y*
8.72%
10Y*
14.46%

EZM

1D
0.68%
1M
2.22%
YTD
11.29%
6M
11.02%
1Y
24.69%
3Y*
16.06%
5Y*
8.11%
10Y*
10.61%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMCG vs. EZM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMCG
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF
20.64%6.55%18.14%20.73%-25.79%15.39%45.64%35.70%-3.68%25.57%
EZM
WisdomTree U.S. MidCap Earnings Fund
11.29%8.42%10.29%19.69%-12.22%31.00%5.57%24.48%-12.36%17.37%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCG and EZM is 0.80, 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

0.80

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.85

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2007

0.81

The correlation between IMCG and EZM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMCG vs. EZM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IMCG
EZM

Technology

30.4%
12.5%

Industrials

26.6%
16.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
15.4%

Financial Services

9.1%
19.3%

Healthcare

7.4%
9.2%

Basic Materials

4.5%
4.4%

Real Estate

3.4%
4.9%

Utilities

2.7%
3.3%

Communication Services

2.6%
1.8%

Energy

2.1%
7.2%

Consumer Defensive

1.2%
5.4%

Technology

IMCG
30.4%
EZM
12.5%

Industrials

IMCG
26.6%
EZM
16.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IMCG
10.0%
EZM
15.4%

Financial Services

IMCG
9.1%
EZM
19.3%

Healthcare

IMCG
7.4%
EZM
9.2%

Basic Materials

IMCG
4.5%
EZM
4.4%

Real Estate

IMCG
3.4%
EZM
4.9%

Utilities

IMCG
2.7%
EZM
3.3%

Communication Services

IMCG
2.6%
EZM
1.8%

Energy

IMCG
2.1%
EZM
7.2%

Consumer Defensive

IMCG
1.2%
EZM
5.4%

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

IMCG vs. EZM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCG
IMCG Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
IMCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCG Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCG Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

EZM
EZM Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
EZM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EZM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
EZM Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
EZM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
EZM Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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.

IMCG vs. EZM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and WisdomTree U.S. MidCap Earnings Fund (EZM). 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.


IMCGEZMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.30

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.36

2.85

-0.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.19

9.66

-0.47

IMCG vs. EZM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the EZM Sharpe Ratio of 1.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCG and EZM, 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


IMCGEZMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.55

1.67

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.43

0.40

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.71

0.48

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.41

+0.13

Drawdowns

IMCG vs. EZM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCG drawdown since its inception was -58.96%, roughly equal to the maximum EZM drawdown of -59.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCG and EZM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMCGEZMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.96%

-59.58%

+0.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.17%

-8.70%

-1.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.92%

-23.53%

+1.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.08%

-23.53%

-11.55%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.08%

-47.26%

+12.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.22%

-8.27%

-0.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.61%

2.56%

+0.05%

Volatility

IMCG vs. EZM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) has a higher volatility of 4.53% compared to WisdomTree U.S. MidCap Earnings Fund (EZM) at 3.33%. This indicates that IMCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EZM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMCGEZMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.53%

3.33%

+1.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.54%

10.25%

+2.29%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.50%

14.84%

+0.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.16%

20.42%

-0.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.51%

22.35%

-1.84%

IMCG vs. EZM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCG has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than EZM's 0.38% expense ratio.


Dividends

IMCG vs. EZM - Dividend Comparison

IMCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than EZM's 1.25% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EZM
WisdomTree U.S. MidCap Earnings Fund
1.25%1.39%1.22%1.25%1.57%1.08%1.67%1.34%1.57%1.14%1.55%1.30%
IMCG
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.65%0.78%0.78%0.85%0.91%0.41%0.09%0.30%0.35%0.45%0.52%0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMCG and EZM have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IMCG has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to EZM (3.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCG dropped -58.96% vs EZM's -59.58%.

On 10-year performance, IMCG leads with 14.46% vs 10.61% for EZM. On fees, IMCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, EZM has been the lower-risk option at 3.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IMCG has performed better with a 14.46% return vs 10.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IMCG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for EZM.

EZM has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.65% for IMCG.

IMCG is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while EZM is Mid Cap Blend Equities. IMCG tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index, while EZM tracks WisdomTree U.S. MidCap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for IMCG and 0.38% for EZM.

EZM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.67 vs 1.55), 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 IMCG and EZM

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