PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWF vs. EWC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWF vs. EWC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWF achieves a 7.28% return, which is significantly lower than EWC's 10.18% return. Over the past 10 years, IWF has outperformed EWC with an annualized return of 18.47%, while EWC has yielded a comparatively lower 11.19% annualized return.


IWF

1D
0.16%
1M
5.33%
YTD
7.28%
6M
6.46%
1Y
25.41%
3Y*
24.91%
5Y*
15.28%
10Y*
18.47%

EWC

1D
1.33%
1M
2.98%
YTD
10.18%
6M
12.96%
1Y
33.37%
3Y*
22.69%
5Y*
11.49%
10Y*
11.19%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWF vs. EWC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
7.28%18.33%33.12%42.59%-29.31%27.43%38.25%35.86%-1.67%29.95%
EWC
iShares MSCI Canada ETF
10.18%35.92%12.38%14.73%-12.95%26.98%5.52%27.58%-17.16%15.73%

Correlation

The correlation between IWF and EWC is 0.59, 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

0.59

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

0.57

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

0.63

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

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2000

0.61

The correlation between IWF and EWC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWF vs. EWC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWF
EWC

Technology

53.2%
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

12.7%
3.8%

Communication Services

12.3%
0.7%

Healthcare

7.0%

-

Industrials

5.0%
9.4%

Financial Services

4.9%
38.1%

Consumer Defensive

2.5%
3.3%

Utilities

1.1%
2.3%

Real Estate

0.4%
0.2%

Energy

0.4%
19.1%

Basic Materials

0.3%
14.8%

Technology

IWF
53.2%
EWC
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

IWF
12.7%
EWC
3.8%

Communication Services

IWF
12.3%
EWC
0.7%

Healthcare

IWF
7.0%
EWC

-

Industrials

IWF
5.0%
EWC
9.4%

Financial Services

IWF
4.9%
EWC
38.1%

Consumer Defensive

IWF
2.5%
EWC
3.3%

Utilities

IWF
1.1%
EWC
2.3%

Real Estate

IWF
0.4%
EWC
0.2%

Energy

IWF
0.4%
EWC
19.1%

Basic Materials

IWF
0.3%
EWC
14.8%

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

IWF vs. EWC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

EWC
EWC Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
EWC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWC Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
EWC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWC Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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.

IWF vs. EWC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC). 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.


IWFEWCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.41

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.57

3.94

-2.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.24

16.23

-10.99

IWF vs. EWC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is lower than the EWC Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWF and EWC, 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


IWFEWCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.65

2.38

-0.72

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

0.67

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

0.60

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.41

-0.01

Drawdowns

IWF vs. EWC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWF drawdown since its inception was -64.25%, which is greater than EWC's maximum drawdown of -60.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWF and EWC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFEWCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.25%

-60.75%

-3.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.27%

-8.51%

-7.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.36%

-12.97%

-10.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.72%

-24.81%

-7.91%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.72%

-42.66%

+9.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.51%

-0.07%

-1.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.08%

-13.14%

-8.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.86%

2.06%

+2.80%

Volatility

IWF vs. EWC - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC) have volatilities of 3.60% and 3.65%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFEWCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.60%

3.65%

-0.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.65%

11.10%

+0.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.43%

14.09%

+1.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.39%

17.25%

+4.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.96%

18.74%

+2.22%

IWF vs. EWC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWF has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than EWC's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWF vs. EWC - Dividend Comparison

IWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, less than EWC's 1.31% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWC
iShares MSCI Canada ETF
1.31%1.45%2.23%2.27%2.34%1.85%2.09%2.16%2.65%1.97%1.75%2.34%
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.33%0.36%0.46%0.67%0.91%0.49%0.66%0.99%1.27%1.10%1.43%1.37%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWF and EWC have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EWC has higher volatility (3.65%) compared to IWF (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWF dropped -64.25% vs EWC's -60.75%.

On 10-year performance, IWF leads with 18.47% vs 11.19% for EWC. On fees, IWF is cheaper at 0.18% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWF has performed better with a 18.47% return vs 11.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWF is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EWC.

EWC has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 0.33% for IWF.

IWF is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while EWC is Canada Equities. IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index, while EWC tracks MSCI Canada Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IWF and 0.49% for EWC.

EWC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.65), 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 IWF and EWC

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