PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMCV vs. IWP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMCV vs. IWP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCV) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCV achieves a 14.96% return, which is significantly higher than IWP's 0.63% return. Over the past 10 years, IMCV has underperformed IWP with an annualized return of 10.54%, while IWP has yielded a comparatively higher 11.64% annualized return.


IMCV

1D
-0.59%
1M
4.45%
6M
10.82%
YTD
14.96%
1Y
23.82%
3Y*
15.08%
5Y*
10.69%
10Y*
10.54%
ALL TIME*
9.85%

IWP

1D
0.00%
1M
-3.07%
6M
-2.52%
YTD
0.63%
1Y
-1.82%
3Y*
12.07%
5Y*
4.51%
10Y*
11.64%
ALL TIME*
9.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMCV vs. IWP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMCV
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
14.96%13.52%12.28%11.89%-6.98%33.56%-4.11%24.72%-10.93%12.60%
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.63%8.45%21.86%25.70%-26.90%12.60%35.25%35.04%-4.89%24.93%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCV and IWP is 0.57, 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

0.57

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

0.69

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

0.74

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

0.69

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2004

0.79

Over the past year, the correlation between IMCV and IWP has dropped to 0.57 - well below their long-term average of 0.79, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IMCV vs. IWP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IMCV
IWP

Financial Services

17.7%
3.9%

Industrials

11.6%
20.7%

Energy

11.4%
4.3%

Healthcare

10.3%
13.2%

Utilities

10.1%
2.7%

Technology

9.3%
33.5%

Consumer Defensive

8.6%
1.2%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
13.3%

Real Estate

5.5%
2.2%

Basic Materials

4.8%
1.6%

Communication Services

2.4%
3.3%

Financial Services

IMCV
17.7%
IWP
3.9%

Industrials

IMCV
11.6%
IWP
20.7%

Energy

IMCV
11.4%
IWP
4.3%

Healthcare

IMCV
10.3%
IWP
13.2%

Utilities

IMCV
10.1%
IWP
2.7%

Technology

IMCV
9.3%
IWP
33.5%

Consumer Defensive

IMCV
8.6%
IWP
1.2%

Consumer Cyclical

IMCV
8.4%
IWP
13.3%

Real Estate

IMCV
5.5%
IWP
2.2%

Basic Materials

IMCV
4.8%
IWP
1.6%

Communication Services

IMCV
2.4%
IWP
3.3%

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

IMCV vs. IWP — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCV
IMCV Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
IMCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCV Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCV Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

IWP
IWP Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 88
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.

IMCV vs. IWP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCV) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). 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.


IMCVIWPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.00

+0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.47

-0.12

+3.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.94

-0.35

+13.29

IMCV vs. IWP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCV Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is higher than the IWP Sharpe Ratio of -0.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCV and IWP, 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...

Drawdowns

IMCV vs. IWP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCV drawdown since its inception was -64.74%, which is greater than IWP's maximum drawdown of -56.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCV and IWP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMCVIWPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.74%

-56.92%

-7.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.90%

-14.79%

+7.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.63%

-25.20%

+6.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.87%

-38.62%

+18.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.33%

-38.62%

-7.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.83%

-6.02%

+5.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.37%

-9.65%

+1.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.85%

5.19%

-3.34%

Volatility

IMCV vs. IWP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCV) is 2.88%, while iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) has a volatility of 5.06%. This indicates that IMCV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMCVIWPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.88%

5.06%

-2.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.17%

13.78%

-5.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.65%

17.32%

-5.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.52%

22.44%

-5.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.55%

21.69%

-2.14%

IMCV vs. IWP - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCV has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than IWP's 0.23% 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

IMCV vs. IWP - Dividend Comparison

IMCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than IWP's 0.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMCV
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
1.84%2.23%2.36%2.30%2.36%1.86%2.61%2.45%2.61%1.87%2.09%2.29%
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.36%0.37%0.40%0.54%0.77%0.30%0.38%0.59%1.02%0.78%1.16%0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMCV and IWP have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWP has higher volatility (5.06%) compared to IMCV (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCV dropped -64.74% vs IWP's -56.92%.

On 10-year performance, IWP leads with 11.64% vs 10.54% for IMCV. On fees, IMCV is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IMCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWP has performed better with a 11.64% return vs 10.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IMCV is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for IWP.

IMCV has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 0.36% for IWP.

IMCV is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while IWP is Mid Cap Growth Equities. IMCV tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Value Index, while IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for IMCV and 0.23% for IWP.

IMCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs -0.11), 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 IMCV and IWP

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