IWB vs. ACWI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWB is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Index, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWB returned 15.17%/yr vs 12.85%/yr for ACWI. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWB charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

IWB vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWB achieves a 10.54% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.13% return. Over the past 10 years, IWB has outperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 15.17%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively lower 12.85% annualized return.

IWB

• 1D: -0.71%
• 1M: 4.95%
• YTD: 10.54%
• 6M: 10.51%
• 1Y: 27.03%
• 3Y*: 22.02%
• 5Y*: 12.99%
• 10Y*: 15.17%

ACWI

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: 5.28%
• YTD: 12.13%
• 6M: 12.96%
• 1Y: 29.18%
• 3Y*: 21.15%
• 5Y*: 11.28%
• 10Y*: 12.85%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWB vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	10.54%	17.18%	24.32%	26.39%	-19.19%	26.32%	20.77%	31.06%	-4.90%	21.52%
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	12.13%	22.41%	17.45%	22.27%	-18.39%	18.66%	16.34%	26.59%	-9.19%	24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between IWB and ACWI is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2008	0.94

The correlation between IWB and ACWI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWB vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWB	ACWI
Technology	36.6%	29.4%
Financial Services	11.3%	16.1%
Communication Services	10.4%	9.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	9.3%
Industrials	8.6%	10.9%
Healthcare	8.6%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	5.0%
Energy	3.3%	4.2%
Utilities	2.5%	2.6%
Real Estate	2.1%	1.8%
Basic Materials	1.9%	3.7%

Return for Risk

IWB vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWB

IWB Risk / Return Rank: 67
IWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
IWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IWB Omega Ratio Rank: 66
IWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
IWB Martin Ratio Rank: 73

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 66
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 67
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

IWB vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.

	IWB	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	2.29	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.12	3.17	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.41	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	3.01	+0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.09	13.53	+0.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWB vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWB and ACWI, 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

	IWB	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.28	2.29	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76	0.71	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84	0.75	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.43	+0.03

Drawdowns

IWB vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWB drawdown since its inception was -55.38%, roughly equal to the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWB and ACWI.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWB	ACWI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.38%	-56.00%	+0.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-9.73%	+0.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.09%	-16.55%	-2.54%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.20%	-26.42%	+1.22%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.60%	-33.53%	-1.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	-0.83%	+0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.86%	-8.61%	-2.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.92%	2.16%	-0.24%

Volatility

IWB vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) is 2.88%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) has a volatility of 3.93%. This indicates that IWB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWB	ACWI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.88%	3.93%	-1.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.97%	10.29%	-1.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.93%	12.78%	-0.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.10%	16.05%	+1.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.14%	17.11%	+1.03%

IWB vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWB has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWB vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

IWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, less than ACWI's 1.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.38%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	0.91%	1.00%	1.14%	1.31%	1.56%	1.09%	1.37%	1.71%	2.06%	1.64%	1.89%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWB and ACWI in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, IWB and ACWI move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IWB or ACWI?

ACWI has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to IWB (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWB dropped -55.38% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

Which ETF is better, IWB or ACWI?

On 10-year performance, IWB leads with 15.17% vs 12.85% for ACWI. On fees, IWB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IWB has been the lower-risk option at 2.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWB or ACWI?

Over the 10-year period, IWB has performed better with a 15.17% return vs 12.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWB or ACWI?

IWB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWB or ACWI?

ACWI has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.91% for IWB.

What is the main difference between IWB and ACWI?

IWB is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ACWI is Global Equities. IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWB and 0.32% for ACWI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 2.28), 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.