ITDF vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ITDF (Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ITDF is a Target Retirement Date fund actively managed by iShares, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. ITDF is actively managed, while IWM is passively managed. Over the past year, ITDF returned 27.50% vs 39.10% for IWM. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ITDF charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

ITDF vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF (ITDF) 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, ITDF achieves a 11.50% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.

ITDF

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 4.54%
• YTD: 11.50%
• 6M: 12.25%
• 1Y: 27.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 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)

ITDF vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ITDF Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF	11.50%	20.86%	16.15%	12.92%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	12.66%	11.38%	19.47%

Correlation

The correlation between ITDF and IWM is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2023	0.83

The correlation between ITDF and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

ITDF vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ITDF	IWM
Technology	26.4%	19.5%
Financial Services	15.8%	15.8%
Industrials	11.7%	17.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	7.8%
Healthcare	8.1%	15.8%
Communication Services	8.0%	2.0%
Real Estate	5.2%	5.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	2.1%
Basic Materials	4.2%	4.5%
Energy	4.2%	6.0%
Utilities	2.6%	3.0%

Return for Risk

ITDF vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ITDF

ITDF Risk / Return Rank: 67
ITDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
ITDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
ITDF Omega Ratio Rank: 68
ITDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
ITDF Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

ITDF vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF (ITDF) 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.

	ITDF	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	2.05	+0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	2.85	+0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.34	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.97	3.56	-0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.13	12.64	+0.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ITDF vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ITDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ITDF 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

	ITDF	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.29	2.05	+0.24
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	1.76	0.37	+1.40

Drawdowns

ITDF vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ITDF drawdown since its inception was -15.67%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITDF and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ITDF	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.67%	-59.05%	+43.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.32%	-11.03%	+1.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.50%	—
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	-0.76%	-1.49%	+0.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.51%	-10.77%	+9.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.10%	3.10%	-1.00%

Volatility

ITDF vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF (ITDF) is 3.79%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that ITDF 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

	ITDF	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.79%	5.75%	-1.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.67%	13.53%	-3.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.04%	19.20%	-7.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.88%	22.52%	-8.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.88%	23.04%	-9.16%

ITDF vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ITDF has a 0.11% 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

ITDF vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

ITDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.48%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ITDF Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF	1.48%	1.65%	1.55%	0.85%	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 ITDF and IWM in my portfolio?

ITDF and IWM have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ITDF or IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to ITDF (3.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITDF dropped -15.67% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, ITDF or IWM?

On 1-year performance, IWM leads with 39.10% vs 27.50% for ITDF. On fees, ITDF is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, ITDF has been the lower-risk option at 3.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ITDF or IWM?

Over the 1-year period, IWM has performed better with a 39.10% return vs 27.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ITDF or IWM?

ITDF is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

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

ITDF has the higher dividend yield at 1.48%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

What is the main difference between ITDF and IWM?

ITDF is categorized as Target Retirement Date, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for ITDF and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ITDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 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.