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

Performance

IWF vs. QTUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and Defiance Quantum ETF (QTUM). 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 4.03% return, which is significantly lower than QTUM's 44.14% return.


IWF

1D
0.24%
1M
-0.45%
YTD
4.03%
6M
2.99%
1Y
21.15%
3Y*
23.62%
5Y*
14.45%
10Y*
18.19%

QTUM

1D
3.25%
1M
8.85%
YTD
44.14%
6M
39.20%
1Y
80.80%
3Y*
48.48%
5Y*
27.81%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWF vs. QTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
4.03%18.33%33.12%42.59%-29.31%27.43%38.25%35.86%-14.53%
QTUM
Defiance Quantum ETF
44.14%36.65%50.54%39.86%-28.80%35.18%42.05%47.99%-19.02%

Correlation

The correlation between IWF and QTUM is 0.74, 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

0.74

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

0.76

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

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2018

0.82

The correlation between IWF and QTUM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWF vs. QTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWF
QTUM

Technology

53.2%
85.1%

Consumer Cyclical

12.7%
0.7%

Communication Services

12.3%
4.9%

Healthcare

7.0%
0.6%

Industrials

5.0%
8.7%

Financial Services

4.9%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.5%

-

Utilities

1.1%

-

Real Estate

0.4%

-

Energy

0.4%

-

Basic Materials

0.3%

-

Technology

IWF
53.2%
QTUM
85.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWF
12.7%
QTUM
0.7%

Communication Services

IWF
12.3%
QTUM
4.9%

Healthcare

IWF
7.0%
QTUM
0.6%

Industrials

IWF
5.0%
QTUM
8.7%

Financial Services

IWF
4.9%
QTUM

-

Consumer Defensive

IWF
2.5%
QTUM

-

Utilities

IWF
1.1%
QTUM

-

Real Estate

IWF
0.4%
QTUM

-

Energy

IWF
0.4%
QTUM

-

Basic Materials

IWF
0.3%
QTUM

-

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. QTUM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

QTUM
QTUM Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
QTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
QTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
QTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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. QTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and Defiance Quantum ETF (QTUM). 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.


IWFQTUMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.47

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.31

5.32

-4.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.35

19.76

-15.41

IWF vs. QTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is lower than the QTUM Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWF and QTUM, 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


IWFQTUMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.35

2.94

-1.59

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

1.04

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

1.03

-0.64

Drawdowns

IWF vs. QTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWF drawdown since its inception was -64.25%, which is greater than QTUM's maximum drawdown of -38.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWF and QTUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFQTUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.25%

-38.45%

-25.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.27%

-15.26%

-1.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.36%

-25.39%

+2.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.72%

-38.45%

+5.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.50%

-6.53%

+2.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.08%

-8.25%

-13.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.88%

4.10%

+0.78%

Volatility

IWF vs. QTUM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is 4.79%, while Defiance Quantum ETF (QTUM) has a volatility of 13.41%. This indicates that IWF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFQTUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.79%

13.41%

-8.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.13%

22.31%

-10.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.78%

27.73%

-11.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.44%

26.85%

-5.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.00%

27.34%

-6.34%

IWF vs. QTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWF has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than QTUM's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWF vs. QTUM - Dividend Comparison

IWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, less than QTUM's 0.74% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.34%0.36%0.46%0.67%0.91%0.49%0.66%0.99%1.27%1.10%1.43%1.37%
QTUM
Defiance Quantum ETF
0.74%1.01%0.61%0.81%1.46%0.48%0.42%0.61%0.21%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWF and QTUM have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QTUM has higher volatility (13.41%) compared to IWF (4.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWF dropped -64.25% vs QTUM's -38.45%.

On 5-year performance, QTUM leads with 27.81% vs 14.45% for IWF. On fees, IWF is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IWF has been the lower-risk option at 4.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QTUM has performed better with a 27.81% return vs 14.45%. 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 0.40% for QTUM.

QTUM has the higher dividend yield at 0.74%, compared with 0.34% for IWF.

IWF is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QTUM is Technology Equities. IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index, while QTUM tracks BlueStar Machine Learning and Quantum Computing Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Defiance. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IWF and 0.40% for QTUM.

QTUM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 1.35), 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 QTUM

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