ISCMF vs. IWM
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 16.78%/yr vs 19.22%/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
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISCMF achieves a 22.87% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 20.47% return.
ISCMF
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -4.99%
- YTD
- 22.87%
- 6M
- 22.87%
- 1Y
- 31.30%
- 3Y*
- 16.78%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWM
- 1D
- -0.96%
- 1M
- 3.82%
- YTD
- 20.47%
- 6M
- 17.64%
- 1Y
- 40.90%
- 3Y*
- 19.22%
- 5Y*
- 6.27%
- 10Y*
- 11.58%
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% | -5.82% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 20.47% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -12.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISCMF and IWM is -0.07, 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 | -0.07 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 17, 2022 | -0.04 |
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
ISCMF vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
ISCMF
IWM
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.
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.
| ISCMF | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.31 | 1.34 | +0.97 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.53 | 3.73 | +1.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.85 | 13.18 | -1.33 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISCMF | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.26% | -0.96% | -4.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.35% | -10.75% | -2.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.65% | 3.11% | -0.46% |
Volatility
ISCMF vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) is 5.11%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 6.56%. This indicates that ISCMF 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISCMF | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.11% | 6.56% | -1.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.45% | 14.31% | +1.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.84% | 19.74% | -1.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.29% | 22.61% | -8.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.29% | 23.06% | -8.77% |
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 0.90%.
| 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 | 0.90% | 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
ISCMF and IWM have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWM has higher volatility (6.56%) compared to ISCMF (5.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISCMF dropped -25.42% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 3-year performance, IWM leads with 19.22% vs 16.78% for ISCMF. Both ETFs have the same 0.19% expense ratio. On volatility, ISCMF has been the lower-risk option at 5.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, IWM has performed better with a 19.22% return vs 16.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISCMF and IWM have the same expense ratio: 0.19% per year.
IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.00% for ISCMF.
ISCMF is categorized as Commodities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. ISCMF tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.76), 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.
Find the right allocation for ISCMF and IWM
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