PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWB vs. SCZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWB vs. SCZ

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) and SCZ (iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWB is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Index, while SCZ is a Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWB returned 15.13%/yr vs 8.64%/yr for SCZ. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWB charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for SCZ.

Performance

IWB vs. SCZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF (SCZ). 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 8.87% return, which is significantly lower than SCZ's 9.70% return. Over the past 10 years, IWB has outperformed SCZ with an annualized return of 15.13%, while SCZ has yielded a comparatively lower 8.64% annualized return.

IWB

1D
0.52%
1M
0.32%
YTD
8.87%
6M
9.10%
1Y
23.60%
3Y*
20.58%
5Y*
12.51%
10Y*
15.13%

SCZ

1D
0.47%
1M
-0.60%
YTD
9.70%
6M
11.43%
1Y
22.15%
3Y*
15.38%
5Y*
4.99%
10Y*
8.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWB vs. SCZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWB
iShares Russell 1000 ETF		8.87%17.18%24.32%26.39%-19.19%26.32%20.77%31.06%-4.90%21.52%
SCZ
iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF		9.70%32.08%1.52%12.98%-21.27%10.12%11.71%24.68%-17.64%32.72%

Correlation

The correlation between IWB and SCZ is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.73

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

0.68

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

0.74

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

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2007

0.77

The correlation between IWB and SCZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWB vs. SCZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWB
SCZ

Technology

36.6%
9.1%

Financial Services

11.3%
12.5%

Communication Services

10.4%
4.1%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
11.8%

Industrials

8.6%
24.6%

Healthcare

8.6%
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

4.5%
5.0%

Energy

3.3%
3.7%

Utilities

2.5%
2.8%

Real Estate

2.1%
10.3%

Basic Materials

1.9%
10.7%

Technology

IWB
36.6%
SCZ
9.1%

Financial Services

IWB
11.3%
SCZ
12.5%

Communication Services

IWB
10.4%
SCZ
4.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWB
10.0%
SCZ
11.8%

Industrials

IWB
8.6%
SCZ
24.6%

Healthcare

IWB
8.6%
SCZ
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

IWB
4.5%
SCZ
5.0%

Energy

IWB
3.3%
SCZ
3.7%

Utilities

IWB
2.5%
SCZ
2.8%

Real Estate

IWB
2.1%
SCZ
10.3%

Basic Materials

IWB
1.9%
SCZ
10.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Russell 1000 ETF

iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF

Often compared with IWB:
IWB vs. IWMIWB vs. SPYIWB vs. VONEIWB vs. IWDIWB vs. VOOIWB vs. IWVIWB vs. VTI
Often compared with SCZ:
SCZ vs. VSSSCZ vs. AVDVSCZ vs. IWMSCZ vs. IEFASCZ vs. VPLSCZ vs. IDEVSCZ vs. ISCF

Return for Risk

IWB vs. SCZ — 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: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWB Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
IWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWB Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank
SCZ
SCZ Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
SCZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCZ Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
SCZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
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. SCZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

IWBSCZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.91
1.49

+0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.60
2.14

+0.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.27

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.67

1.95

+0.73

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.98

7.36

+4.63

IWB vs. SCZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWB Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is comparable to the SCZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWB and SCZ, 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...

Drawdowns

IWB vs. SCZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWB drawdown since its inception was -55.38%, smaller than the maximum SCZ drawdown of -61.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWB and SCZ.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWBSCZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.38%

-61.86%

+6.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.86%

-11.43%

+2.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.09%

-15.06%

-4.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.20%

-36.87%

+11.67%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.60%

-41.07%

+6.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.21%

-1.66%

-0.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.85%

-13.05%

+2.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.98%

3.02%

-1.04%

Volatility

IWB vs. SCZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) is 4.37%, while iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF (SCZ) has a volatility of 5.27%. This indicates that IWB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWBSCZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.37%

5.27%

-0.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.64%

12.52%

-2.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.39%

14.93%

-2.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.17%

16.81%

+0.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.16%

17.43%

+0.73%

IWB vs. SCZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWB has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than SCZ's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWB vs. SCZ - Dividend Comparison

IWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, less than SCZ's 3.01% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
SCZ
iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF		3.01%3.30%3.50%2.96%1.99%2.96%1.52%3.52%2.79%2.38%2.82%2.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

IWB and SCZ have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SCZ has higher volatility (5.27%) compared to IWB (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWB dropped -55.38% vs SCZ's -61.86%.

On 10-year performance, IWB leads with 15.13% vs 8.64% for SCZ. On fees, IWB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IWB has been the lower-risk option at 4.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWB has performed better with a 15.13% return vs 8.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for SCZ.

SCZ has the higher dividend yield at 3.01%, compared with 0.93% for IWB.

IWB is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while SCZ is Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities. IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index, while SCZ tracks MSCI EAFE Small Cap Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWB and 0.40% for SCZ.

IWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 1.49), 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 SCZ

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