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

Performance

IWF vs. TPYP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and Tortoise North American Pipeline Fund (TPYP). 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 4.89% return, which is significantly lower than TPYP's 20.31% return. Over the past 10 years, IWF has outperformed TPYP with an annualized return of 17.73%, while TPYP has yielded a comparatively lower 11.32% annualized return.


IWF

1D
-0.33%
1M
0.72%
6M
9.36%
YTD
4.89%
1Y
13.84%
3Y*
22.10%
5Y*
12.50%
10Y*
17.73%
ALL TIME*
8.41%

TPYP

1D
-1.47%
1M
0.33%
6M
10.96%
YTD
20.31%
1Y
22.13%
3Y*
23.42%
5Y*
18.93%
10Y*
11.32%
ALL TIME*
9.51%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$429.61M$538.46M$628.33M
$2.68M$2.32M$2.66M

IWF vs. TPYP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
4.89%18.33%33.12%42.59%-29.31%27.43%38.25%35.86%-1.67%29.95%
TPYP
Tortoise North American Pipeline Fund
20.31%7.59%37.37%10.51%16.09%34.97%-20.99%23.35%-11.13%2.27%

Correlation

The correlation between IWF and TPYP is -0.26, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.26

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.09

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.27

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2015

0.35

The correlation between IWF and TPYP shifts across timeframes, from -0.26 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWF vs. TPYP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWF
TPYP

Technology

54.2%

-

Communication Services

16.2%

-

Industrials

9.0%
0.1%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%

-

Healthcare

5.4%

-

Financial Services

4.3%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.2%

-

Energy

0.5%
69.6%

Real Estate

0.4%

-

Utilities

0.3%
21.2%

Basic Materials

0.3%
0.1%

Technology

IWF
54.2%
TPYP

-

Communication Services

IWF
16.2%
TPYP

-

Industrials

IWF
9.0%
TPYP
0.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWF
8.3%
TPYP

-

Healthcare

IWF
5.4%
TPYP

-

Financial Services

IWF
4.3%
TPYP
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWF
1.2%
TPYP

-

Energy

IWF
0.5%
TPYP
69.6%

Real Estate

IWF
0.4%
TPYP

-

Utilities

IWF
0.3%
TPYP
21.2%

Basic Materials

IWF
0.3%
TPYP
0.1%

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. TPYP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

TPYP
TPYP Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
TPYP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TPYP Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
TPYP Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
TPYP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
TPYP Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IWF vs. TPYP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) and Tortoise North American Pipeline Fund (TPYP). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


IWFTPYPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.81

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.27

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.85

3.25

-2.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.53

7.64

-5.10

IWF vs. TPYP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWF Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is lower than the TPYP Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWF and TPYP, 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...

Drawdowns

IWF vs. TPYP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWF drawdown since its inception was -64.25%, which is greater than TPYP's maximum drawdown of -51.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWF and TPYP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFTPYPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.25%

-51.91%

-12.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.27%

-6.84%

-9.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.36%

-13.17%

-10.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.72%

-17.96%

-14.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.72%

-51.91%

+19.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.71%

-5.54%

+1.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.97%

-7.82%

-14.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.47%

2.91%

+2.56%

Volatility

IWF vs. TPYP - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) has a higher volatility of 7.01% compared to Tortoise North American Pipeline Fund (TPYP) at 4.74%. This indicates that IWF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TPYP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFTPYPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.01%

4.74%

+2.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.34%

11.18%

+3.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.63%

13.98%

+3.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.77%

17.41%

+4.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.13%

21.90%

-0.77%

IWF vs. TPYP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

IWF vs. TPYP - Dividend Comparison

IWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, less than TPYP's 3.28% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.35%0.36%0.46%0.67%0.91%0.49%0.66%0.99%1.27%1.10%1.43%1.37%
TPYP
Tortoise North American Pipeline Fund
3.28%3.91%3.95%4.83%4.48%4.86%6.14%4.45%4.58%3.71%3.49%2.56%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWF and TPYP have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWF has higher volatility (7.01%) compared to TPYP (4.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWF dropped -64.25% vs TPYP's -51.91%.

On 10-year performance, IWF leads with 17.73% vs 11.32% for TPYP. On fees, IWF is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, TPYP has been the lower-risk option at 4.74%. 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 17.73% return vs 11.32%. 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 TPYP.

TPYP has the higher dividend yield at 3.28%, compared with 0.35% for IWF.

IWF is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while TPYP is MLPs. IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index, while TPYP tracks Tortoise North American Pipeline Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Tortoise. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IWF and 0.40% for TPYP.

TPYP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 0.79), 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 TPYP

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