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

Performance

IWF vs. SLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and iShares Silver Trust (SLV). 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 7.11% return, which is significantly higher than SLV's 2.78% return. Over the past 10 years, IWF has outperformed SLV with an annualized return of 18.49%, while SLV has yielded a comparatively lower 15.55% annualized 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%

SLV

1D
-2.62%
1M
0.41%
YTD
2.78%
6M
24.76%
1Y
110.59%
3Y*
45.06%
5Y*
20.76%
10Y*
15.55%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWF vs. SLV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
7.11%18.33%33.12%42.59%-29.31%27.43%38.25%35.86%-1.67%29.95%
SLV
iShares Silver Trust
2.78%144.66%20.89%-1.09%2.37%-12.45%47.30%14.88%-9.19%5.82%

Correlation

The correlation between IWF and SLV is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.23

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

0.21

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

0.20

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

0.18

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 2006

0.20

IWF vs. SLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWF
SLV

Technology

53.2%

-

Consumer Cyclical

12.7%

-

Communication Services

12.3%

-

Healthcare

7.0%

-

Industrials

5.0%

-

Financial Services

4.9%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.5%

-

Utilities

1.1%

-

Real Estate

0.4%

-

Energy

0.4%

-

Basic Materials

0.3%
100.0%

Technology

IWF
53.2%
SLV

-

Consumer Cyclical

IWF
12.7%
SLV

-

Communication Services

IWF
12.3%
SLV

-

Healthcare

IWF
7.0%
SLV

-

Industrials

IWF
5.0%
SLV

-

Financial Services

IWF
4.9%
SLV

-

Consumer Defensive

IWF
2.5%
SLV

-

Utilities

IWF
1.1%
SLV

-

Real Estate

IWF
0.4%
SLV

-

Energy

IWF
0.4%
SLV

-

Basic Materials

IWF
0.3%
SLV
100.0%

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. SLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

SLV
SLV Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
SLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
SLV Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
SLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
SLV Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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. SLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and iShares Silver Trust (SLV). 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.


IWFSLVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.35

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.58

2.62

-1.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.28

5.64

-0.36

IWF vs. SLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is comparable to the SLV Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWF and SLV, 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


IWFSLVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.67

1.89

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

0.58

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

0.49

+0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.25

+0.15

Drawdowns

IWF vs. SLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWF drawdown since its inception was -64.25%, smaller than the maximum SLV drawdown of -76.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWF and SLV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFSLVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.25%

-76.28%

+12.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.27%

-42.45%

+26.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.36%

-42.45%

+19.09%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.72%

-42.45%

+9.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.72%

-42.81%

+10.09%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.66%

-37.30%

+35.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.08%

-44.67%

+22.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.86%

19.67%

-14.81%

Volatility

IWF vs. SLV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) is 3.61%, while iShares Silver Trust (SLV) has a volatility of 16.30%. This indicates that IWF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFSLVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.61%

16.30%

-12.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.66%

58.31%

-46.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.44%

58.90%

-43.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.40%

36.15%

-14.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.97%

31.84%

-10.87%

IWF vs. SLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWF has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than SLV's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWF vs. SLV - Dividend Comparison

IWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, while SLV has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
SLV
iShares Silver Trust
0.00%0.00%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 SLV have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SLV has higher volatility (16.30%) compared to IWF (3.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWF dropped -64.25% vs SLV's -76.28%.

On 10-year performance, IWF leads with 18.49% vs 15.55% for SLV. On fees, IWF is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IWF has been the lower-risk option at 3.61%. 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 18.49% return vs 15.55%. 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 0.50% for SLV.

IWF has the higher dividend yield at 0.33%, compared with 0.00% for SLV.

IWF is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while SLV is Silver. IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index, while SLV tracks LBMA Silver Price. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IWF and 0.50% for SLV.

SLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.67), 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 SLV

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