ISCMF vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ISCMF (iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ISCMF is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ISCMF returned 15.20%/yr vs 17.88%/yr for IWM. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.19% expense ratio.

Performance

ISCMF vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) 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, ISCMF achieves a 22.87% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 17.07% return.

ISCMF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.67%
• YTD: 22.87%
• 6M: 27.76%
• 1Y: 37.85%
• 3Y*: 15.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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)

ISCMF vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF	22.87%	19.65%	3.13%	-9.58%	-5.08%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-13.76%

Correlation

The correlation between ISCMF and IWM is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2022	-0.04

Return for Risk

ISCMF vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ISCMF

ISCMF Risk / Return Rank: 83
ISCMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
ISCMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
ISCMF Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ISCMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
ISCMF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

ISCMF vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) 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.

	ISCMF	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	2.05	0.00
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.74	2.85	+0.88
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.53	1.34	+1.19
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.69	3.56	+3.12
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.68	12.64	+3.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ISCMF vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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

	ISCMF	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	2.05	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.27	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.37	+0.09

Drawdowns

ISCMF vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISCMF drawdown since its inception was -25.42%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISCMF and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISCMF	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.42%	-59.05%	+33.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.69%	-11.03%	+5.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.62%	-27.50%	+19.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.91%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.26%	-1.49%	-3.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.43%	-10.77%	-2.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.42%	3.10%	-0.68%

Volatility

ISCMF vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) has a higher volatility of 7.14% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 5.75%. This indicates that ISCMF'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

	ISCMF	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.14%	5.75%	+1.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.90%	13.53%	+2.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.53%	19.20%	-0.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.38%	22.52%	-8.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.38%	23.04%	-8.66%

ISCMF vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ISCMF and IWM have an expense ratio of 0.19%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

ISCMF vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

ISCMF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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 ISCMF and IWM in my portfolio?

ISCMF and IWM have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ISCMF or IWM?

ISCMF has higher volatility (7.14%) compared to IWM (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISCMF dropped -25.42% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, ISCMF or IWM?

On 3-year performance, IWM leads with 17.88% vs 15.20% for ISCMF. Both ETFs have the same 0.19% expense ratio. 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, ISCMF or IWM?

Over the 3-year period, IWM has performed better with a 17.88% return vs 15.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ISCMF or IWM?

ISCMF and IWM have the same expense ratio: 0.19% per year.

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

IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.00% for ISCMF.

What is the main difference between ISCMF and IWM?

ISCMF is categorized as Commodities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. ISCMF tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 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.