IWF vs. SLV
IWF (iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF) and SLV (iShares Silver Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - IWF is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index, while SLV is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWF returned 18.49%/yr vs 15.55%/yr for SLV. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWF charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for SLV.
Performance
IWF vs. SLV - Performance Comparison
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%
IWF vs. SLV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Financial Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
-
Basic Materials
Technology
IWF
SLV
-
Consumer Cyclical
IWF
SLV
-
Communication Services
IWF
SLV
-
Healthcare
IWF
SLV
-
Industrials
IWF
SLV
-
Financial Services
IWF
SLV
-
Consumer Defensive
IWF
SLV
-
Utilities
IWF
SLV
-
Real Estate
IWF
SLV
-
Energy
IWF
SLV
-
Basic Materials
IWF
SLV
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
IWF
SLV
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.
| IWF | SLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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 | SLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| IWF | SLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.66% | -37.30% | +35.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.08% | -44.67% | +22.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| IWF | SLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| 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% |
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.
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