IWB vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWB is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWB returned 15.40%/yr vs 11.68%/yr for IWM. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWB charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

IWB vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) 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, IWB achieves a 9.46% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 21.64% return. Over the past 10 years, IWB has outperformed IWM with an annualized return of 15.40%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively lower 11.68% annualized return.

IWB

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 9.46%
• 6M: 8.85%
• 1Y: 25.98%
• 3Y*: 21.03%
• 5Y*: 12.64%
• 10Y*: 15.40%

IWM

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 4.83%
• YTD: 21.64%
• 6M: 18.08%
• 1Y: 44.01%
• 3Y*: 19.60%
• 5Y*: 6.77%
• 10Y*: 11.68%

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

IWB vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	9.46%	17.18%	24.32%	26.39%	-19.19%	26.32%	20.77%	31.06%	-4.90%	21.52%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	21.64%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-20.48%	14.54%	20.03%	25.39%	-11.12%	14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between IWB and IWM is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2000	0.86

The correlation between IWB and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWB vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWB	IWM
Technology	37.3%	20.1%
Financial Services	11.3%	15.5%
Communication Services	10.4%	1.7%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	8.0%
Industrials	8.7%	17.3%
Healthcare	8.5%	15.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	2.0%
Energy	3.2%	6.0%
Real Estate	2.1%	5.5%
Utilities	2.1%	3.1%
Basic Materials	1.9%	4.5%

Return for Risk

IWB vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWB

IWB Risk / Return Rank: 66
IWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
IWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
IWB Omega Ratio Rank: 65
IWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
IWB Martin Ratio Rank: 72

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 72
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 63
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	IWB	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.24	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	3.05	-0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.36	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.94	4.01	-1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.13	14.19	-1.06

IWB vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWB 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.

Drawdowns

IWB vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWB drawdown since its inception was -55.38%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWB and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWB	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.38%	-59.05%	+3.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-11.03%	+2.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.09%	-27.50%	+8.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.20%	-31.91%	+6.71%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.60%	-41.13%	+6.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.68%	0.00%	-1.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.84%	-10.75%	-0.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.98%	3.11%	-1.13%

Volatility

IWB vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) is 4.65%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 6.47%. This indicates that IWB 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

	IWB	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.65%	6.47%	-1.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.80%	14.28%	-4.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.52%	19.75%	-7.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.19%	22.60%	-5.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.19%	23.09%	-4.90%

IWB vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWB has a 0.15% 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

IWB vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, more than IWM's 0.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	0.93%	1.00%	1.14%	1.31%	1.56%	1.09%	1.37%	1.71%	2.06%	1.64%	1.89%	1.95%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.89%	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 IWB and IWM in my portfolio?

IWB and IWM have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWB or IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (6.47%) compared to IWB (4.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWB dropped -55.38% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, IWB or IWM?

On 10-year performance, IWB leads with 15.40% vs 11.68% for IWM. On fees, IWB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IWB has been the lower-risk option at 4.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWB or IWM?

Over the 10-year period, IWB has performed better with a 15.40% return vs 11.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWB or IWM?

IWB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

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

IWB has the higher dividend yield at 0.93%, compared with 0.89% for IWM.

What is the main difference between IWB and IWM?

IWB is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWB and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 2.09), 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.