PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWB vs. MTUM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWB vs. MTUM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWB achieves a 10.54% return, which is significantly lower than MTUM's 31.75% return. Over the past 10 years, IWB has underperformed MTUM with an annualized return of 15.17%, while MTUM has yielded a comparatively higher 17.31% 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%

MTUM

1D
1.06%
1M
15.90%
YTD
31.75%
6M
32.38%
1Y
41.76%
3Y*
34.75%
5Y*
15.21%
10Y*
17.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWB vs. MTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
31.75%22.15%32.89%9.15%-18.27%13.36%29.86%27.25%-1.67%37.50%

Correlation

The correlation between IWB and MTUM is 0.84, 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

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.88

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2013

0.86

The correlation between IWB and MTUM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWB vs. MTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWB
MTUM

Technology

36.6%
44.4%

Financial Services

11.3%
10.4%

Communication Services

10.4%
7.4%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
3.6%

Industrials

8.6%
15.6%

Healthcare

8.6%
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

4.5%
3.3%

Energy

3.3%
3.5%

Utilities

2.5%
1.6%

Real Estate

2.1%
1.8%

Basic Materials

1.9%
1.7%

Technology

IWB
36.6%
MTUM
44.4%

Financial Services

IWB
11.3%
MTUM
10.4%

Communication Services

IWB
10.4%
MTUM
7.4%

Consumer Cyclical

IWB
10.0%
MTUM
3.6%

Industrials

IWB
8.6%
MTUM
15.6%

Healthcare

IWB
8.6%
MTUM
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

IWB
4.5%
MTUM
3.3%

Energy

IWB
3.3%
MTUM
3.5%

Utilities

IWB
2.5%
MTUM
1.6%

Real Estate

IWB
2.1%
MTUM
1.8%

Basic Materials

IWB
1.9%
MTUM
1.7%

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. MTUM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWB
IWB Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
IWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWB Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
IWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWB Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

MTUM
MTUM Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
MTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
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. MTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


IWBMTUMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.39

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.06

3.64

-0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.09

14.50

-0.40

IWB vs. MTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the MTUM Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWB and MTUM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IWBMTUMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.28

2.20

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

0.74

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.84

0.83

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.85

-0.40

Drawdowns

IWB vs. MTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWB drawdown since its inception was -55.38%, which is greater than MTUM's maximum drawdown of -34.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWB and MTUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWBMTUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.38%

-34.08%

-21.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.86%

-11.54%

+2.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.09%

-20.99%

+1.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.20%

-32.28%

+7.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.60%

-34.08%

-0.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.71%

0.00%

-0.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.86%

-6.21%

-4.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.92%

2.89%

-0.97%

Volatility

IWB vs. MTUM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) is 2.88%, while iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) has a volatility of 7.68%. This indicates that IWB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWBMTUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.88%

7.68%

-4.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.97%

16.46%

-7.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.93%

19.04%

-7.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.10%

20.60%

-3.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.14%

21.03%

-2.89%

IWB vs. MTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IWB and MTUM have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IWB vs. MTUM - Dividend Comparison

IWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, more than MTUM's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
0.60%0.91%0.75%1.35%1.80%0.55%0.83%1.48%1.27%1.02%1.43%1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWB and MTUM have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MTUM has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to IWB (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWB dropped -55.38% vs MTUM's -34.08%.

On 10-year performance, MTUM leads with 17.31% vs 15.17% for IWB. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. 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.

Over the 10-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 17.31% return vs 15.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWB and MTUM have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

IWB has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.60% for MTUM.

IWB is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while MTUM is Momentum. IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index, while MTUM tracks MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index.

IWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 2.20), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWB and MTUM

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