IPAC vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IPAC (iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IPAC is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IPAC returned 9.13%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IPAC charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

IPAC vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) 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, IPAC achieves a 13.73% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return. Over the past 10 years, IPAC has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 9.13%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.93% annualized return.

IPAC

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 4.62%
• YTD: 13.73%
• 6M: 15.39%
• 1Y: 28.03%
• 3Y*: 17.03%
• 5Y*: 7.65%
• 10Y*: 9.13%

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)

IPAC vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	13.73%	25.16%	6.18%	14.51%	-13.68%	3.09%	12.39%	19.44%	-12.78%	25.97%
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 IPAC and IWM is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2014	0.67

The correlation between IPAC and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

IPAC vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IPAC	IWM
Financial Services	22.9%	15.8%
Industrials	21.3%	17.1%
Technology	12.9%	19.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.8%	7.8%
Basic Materials	8.2%	4.5%
Communication Services	5.7%	2.0%
Real Estate	5.5%	5.7%
Healthcare	5.3%	15.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	2.1%
Utilities	1.9%	3.0%
Energy	1.8%	6.0%

Return for Risk

IPAC vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPAC

IPAC Risk / Return Rank: 50
IPAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Omega Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

IPAC vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) 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.

	IPAC	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	2.05	-0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	2.85	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.34	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	3.56	-1.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.83	12.64	-3.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IPAC vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAC Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAC 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

	IPAC	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.72	2.05	-0.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.27	+0.19
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	0.48	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.37	+0.08

Drawdowns

IPAC vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	IPAC	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.99%	-59.05%	+28.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.49%	-11.03%	-0.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.45%	-27.50%	+12.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.64%	-31.91%	+2.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.99%	-41.13%	+10.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-1.49%	+0.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.48%	-10.77%	+3.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.18%	3.10%	+0.08%

Volatility

IPAC vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) is 4.00%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that IPAC 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.

Volatility by Period

	IPAC	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.00%	5.75%	-1.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.09%	13.53%	-0.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.41%	19.20%	-2.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.62%	22.52%	-5.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.58%	23.04%	-6.46%

IPAC vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAC has a 0.09% 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

IPAC vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.80%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	3.80%	4.32%	3.43%	3.16%	2.76%	4.03%	1.68%	3.37%	2.95%	2.98%	2.66%	2.60%
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 IPAC and IWM in my portfolio?

IPAC and IWM have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IPAC or IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to IPAC (4.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAC dropped -30.99% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, IPAC or IWM?

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.93% vs 9.13% for IPAC. On fees, IPAC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IPAC has been the lower-risk option at 4.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IPAC or IWM?

Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.93% return vs 9.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IPAC or IWM?

IPAC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

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

IPAC has the higher dividend yield at 3.80%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

What is the main difference between IPAC and IWM?

IPAC is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IPAC and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.72), 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.