IWB vs. AFOS
IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) and AFOS (ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWB charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for AFOS.
Performance
IWB vs. AFOS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWB achieves a 10.54% return, which is significantly lower than AFOS's 32.04% 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%
AFOS
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 8.94%
- YTD
- 32.04%
- 6M
- 37.37%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWB vs. AFOS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF | 10.54% | 11.69% |
AFOS ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF | 32.04% | 36.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWB and AFOS 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2025 | 0.83 |
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
IWB vs. AFOS — Risk / Return Rank
IWB
AFOS
IWB vs. AFOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF (AFOS). 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 | AFOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.06 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.09 | — | — |
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
| IWB | AFOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.28 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.84 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 4.35 | -3.90 |
Drawdowns
IWB vs. AFOS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWB drawdown since its inception was -55.38%, which is greater than AFOS's maximum drawdown of -11.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWB and AFOS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWB | AFOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.38% | -11.52% | -43.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.86% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.09% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.20% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.60% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.71% | -0.29% | -0.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.86% | -1.37% | -9.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.92% | — | — |
Volatility
IWB vs. AFOS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWB | AFOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.88% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.97% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.93% | 20.19% | -8.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.10% | 20.19% | -3.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.14% | 20.19% | -2.05% |
IWB vs. AFOS - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWB has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than AFOS's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWB vs. AFOS - Dividend Comparison
IWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, more than AFOS's 0.22% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AFOS ARS Focused Opportunities Strategy ETF | 0.22% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
IWB and AFOS 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.
On fees, IWB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IWB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for AFOS.
IWB has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.22% for AFOS.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and ARS Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWB and 0.45% for AFOS.
Find the right allocation for IWB and AFOS
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