IWB vs. IWM
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM).
IWB and IWM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IWB is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 1000 Index. It was launched on May 15, 2000. IWM is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 Index. It was launched on May 22, 2000. Both IWB and IWM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: IWB or IWM.
Correlation
The correlation between IWB and IWM is 0.86, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
IWB vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
IWB:
1.94
IWM:
0.66
IWB:
2.59
IWM:
1.05
IWB:
1.36
IWM:
1.13
IWB:
2.93
IWM:
0.71
IWB:
12.86
IWM:
3.54
IWB:
1.92%
IWM:
3.90%
IWB:
12.71%
IWM:
21.00%
IWB:
-55.38%
IWM:
-59.05%
IWB:
-4.21%
IWM:
-8.62%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWB achieves a 23.71% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 11.32% return. Over the past 10 years, IWB has outperformed IWM with an annualized return of 12.66%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively lower 7.87% annualized return.
IWB
23.71%
-0.69%
8.01%
23.81%
14.13%
12.66%
IWM
11.32%
-3.25%
10.71%
11.61%
7.28%
7.87%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
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%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
IWB vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Performance 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.
Dividends
IWB vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
IWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, less than IWM's 1.48% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF | 0.83% | 1.31% | 1.56% | 1.09% | 1.37% | 1.71% | 2.06% | 1.64% | 1.89% | 1.95% | 1.71% | 1.68% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% | 1.26% | 1.23% |
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. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
IWB vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) is 3.87%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 6.13%. 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.