IWF vs. SGRT
IWF (iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF) and SGRT (SMART Earnings Growth 30 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. IWF is passively managed, while SGRT is actively managed. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWF charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for SGRT.
Performance
IWF vs. SGRT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWF achieves a 7.11% return, which is significantly lower than SGRT's 51.46% return.
IWF
- 1D
- -1.29%
- 1M
- 5.68%
- YTD
- 7.11%
- 6M
- 6.51%
- 1Y
- 25.60%
- 3Y*
- 24.80%
- 5Y*
- 15.24%
- 10Y*
- 18.49%
SGRT
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 14.68%
- YTD
- 51.46%
- 6M
- 56.17%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWF vs. SGRT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | 7.11% | 7.70% |
SGRT SMART Earnings Growth 30 ETF | 51.46% | 25.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWF and SGRT is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2025 | 0.68 |
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. SGRT — Risk / Return Rank
IWF
SGRT
IWF vs. SGRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and SMART Earnings Growth 30 ETF (SGRT). 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.
| IWF | SGRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.58 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.28 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IWF | SGRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.67 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.88 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.40 | 3.81 | -3.41 |
Drawdowns
IWF vs. SGRT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWF drawdown since its inception was -64.25%, which is greater than SGRT's maximum drawdown of -17.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWF and SGRT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWF | SGRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.25% | -17.87% | -46.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.27% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.36% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.72% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.66% | 0.00% | -1.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.08% | -3.11% | -18.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.86% | — | — |
Volatility
IWF vs. SGRT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWF | SGRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.61% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.66% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.44% | 33.41% | -17.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.40% | 33.41% | -12.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.97% | 33.41% | -12.44% |
IWF vs. SGRT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWF has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than SGRT's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWF vs. SGRT - Dividend Comparison
IWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, more than SGRT's 0.11% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SGRT SMART Earnings Growth 30 ETF | 0.11% | 0.16% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWF and SGRT have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IWF is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IWF is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for SGRT.
IWF has the higher dividend yield at 0.33%, compared with 0.11% for SGRT.
Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IWF and 0.59% for SGRT.
Find the right allocation for IWF and SGRT
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