ITB vs. IWM
ITB (iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ITB is a Building & Construction fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ITB returned 13.64%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ITB charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
ITB vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ITB achieves a -3.80% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return. Over the past 10 years, ITB has outperformed IWM with an annualized return of 13.64%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively lower 10.93% annualized return.
ITB
- 1D
- -0.85%
- 1M
- 1.29%
- YTD
- -3.80%
- 6M
- -12.12%
- 1Y
- 4.04%
- 3Y*
- 7.27%
- 5Y*
- 6.42%
- 10Y*
- 13.64%
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%
ITB vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF | -3.80% | -5.26% | 2.06% | 68.91% | -26.26% | 49.25% | 26.42% | 48.70% | -30.92% | 59.65% |
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 ITB and IWM 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 | 0.58 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2006 | 0.70 |
The correlation between ITB and IWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (1 year) to 0.70 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ITB vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ITB
IWM
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
ITB
IWM
Industrials
ITB
IWM
Basic Materials
ITB
IWM
Real Estate
ITB
IWM
Communication Services
ITB
-
IWM
Consumer Defensive
ITB
-
IWM
Energy
ITB
-
IWM
Financial Services
ITB
-
IWM
Healthcare
ITB
-
IWM
Technology
ITB
-
IWM
Utilities
ITB
-
IWM
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
ITB vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
ITB
IWM
ITB vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) 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.
| ITB | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.40 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.34 | -0.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.16 | 3.56 | -3.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.31 | 12.64 | -12.33 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ITB | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.14 | 2.05 | -1.91 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 | 0.27 | -0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.46 | 0.48 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.11 | 0.37 | -0.26 |
Drawdowns
ITB vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ITB drawdown since its inception was -86.53%, which is greater than IWM's maximum drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITB and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ITB | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.53% | -59.05% | -27.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.04% | -11.03% | -15.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.35% | -27.50% | -5.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.55% | -31.91% | -8.64% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.10% | -41.13% | -10.97% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.07% | -1.49% | -25.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -37.10% | -10.77% | -26.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.09% | 3.10% | +9.99% |
Volatility
ITB vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) has a higher volatility of 8.17% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 5.75%. This indicates that ITB'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ITB | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.17% | 5.75% | +2.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.42% | 13.53% | +6.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.47% | 19.20% | +10.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.19% | 22.52% | +6.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.00% | 23.04% | +6.96% |
ITB vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
ITB has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
ITB vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
ITB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF | 1.23% | 1.67% | 0.46% | 0.48% | 0.86% | 0.37% | 0.46% | 0.50% | 0.63% | 0.28% | 0.43% | 0.34% |
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
ITB and IWM 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.
ITB has higher volatility (8.17%) compared to IWM (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITB dropped -86.53% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 10-year performance, ITB leads with 13.64% vs 10.93% for IWM. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. 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.
Over the 10-year period, ITB has performed better with a 13.64% return vs 10.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for ITB.
ITB has the higher dividend yield at 1.23%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.
ITB is categorized as Building & Construction, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. ITB tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for ITB and 0.19% for IWM.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 0.14), 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 ITB 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