PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWFM.L vs. IWF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWFM.L vs. IWF

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWFM.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc)) and IWF (iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFM.L is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI World Momentum Index, while IWF is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWFM.L returned 16.44%/yr vs 19.33%/yr for IWF. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWFM.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IWF.

Performance

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWFM.L) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IWFM.L is traded in GBp, while IWF is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IWF values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFM.L achieves a 22.13% return, which is significantly higher than IWF's 7.51% return. Over the past 10 years, IWFM.L has underperformed IWF with an annualized return of 16.44%, while IWF has yielded a comparatively higher 19.33% annualized return.

IWFM.L

1D
-0.86%
1M
8.93%
YTD
22.13%
6M
22.59%
1Y
35.15%
3Y*
26.24%
5Y*
14.83%
10Y*
16.44%

IWF

1D
0.00%
1M
6.09%
YTD
7.51%
6M
5.52%
1Y
26.39%
3Y*
21.70%
5Y*
16.48%
10Y*
19.33%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWFM.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc)		22.13%12.72%32.62%5.85%-8.21%15.58%24.16%23.25%1.62%20.40%
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF		7.72%9.90%35.45%35.46%-20.90%28.64%34.19%30.69%4.16%18.71%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFM.L and IWF is 0.54, 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

0.54

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

0.55

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

0.48

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2014

0.52

The correlation between IWFM.L and IWF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWFM.L
IWF

Technology

26.0%
53.2%

Industrials

18.7%
5.0%

Financial Services

13.1%
4.9%

Healthcare

10.7%
7.0%

Energy

10.6%
0.4%

Communication Services

6.8%
12.3%

Basic Materials

6.0%
0.3%

Utilities

3.7%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

1.6%
12.7%

Consumer Defensive

1.5%
2.5%

Real Estate

1.4%
0.4%

Technology

IWFM.L
26.0%
IWF
53.2%

Industrials

IWFM.L
18.7%
IWF
5.0%

Financial Services

IWFM.L
13.1%
IWF
4.9%

Healthcare

IWFM.L
10.7%
IWF
7.0%

Energy

IWFM.L
10.6%
IWF
0.4%

Communication Services

IWFM.L
6.8%
IWF
12.3%

Basic Materials

IWFM.L
6.0%
IWF
0.3%

Utilities

IWFM.L
3.7%
IWF
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWFM.L
1.6%
IWF
12.7%

Consumer Defensive

IWFM.L
1.5%
IWF
2.5%

Real Estate

IWFM.L
1.4%
IWF
0.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc)

iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF

Often compared with IWFM.L:
IWFM.L vs. SPMOIWFM.L vs. XDEM.DEIWFM.L vs. IMTMIWFM.L vs. IUMF.LIWFM.L vs. SPYIWFM.L vs. JPGL.LIWFM.L vs. ACWI
Often compared with IWF:
IWF vs. IWDIWF vs. VUGIWF vs. SPYIWF vs. VOOIWF vs. IWMIWF vs. VONGIWF vs. IWY

Return for Risk

IWFM.L vs. IWF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWFM.L
IWFM.L Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
IWFM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
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.

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWFM.L) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF). 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.

IWFM.LIWFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.16
1.76

+0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.18
2.36

+0.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.31

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.91

1.63

+2.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.27

4.54

+10.73

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFM.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the IWF Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFM.L and IWF, 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

IWFM.LIWFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.16

1.76

+0.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

0.82

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.98

0.93

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.98

0.73

+0.25

Drawdowns

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFM.L drawdown since its inception was -22.58%, smaller than the maximum IWF drawdown of -31.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFM.L and IWF.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWFM.LIWFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.58%

-31.98%

+9.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.95%

-16.31%

+7.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.40%

-26.33%

+5.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.40%

-26.35%

+5.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.58%

-26.35%

+3.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.86%

-1.46%

+0.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.94%

-5.42%

+0.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.30%

5.83%

-3.53%

Volatility

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Volatility Comparison

iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWFM.L) has a higher volatility of 5.85% compared to iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) at 3.67%. This indicates that IWFM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWFM.LIWFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.85%

3.67%

+2.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.75%

10.75%

+3.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.21%

15.05%

+1.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.47%

20.27%

-3.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.18%

20.95%

-3.77%

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFM.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IWF's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IWFM.L vs. IWF - Dividend Comparison

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

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%
IWFM.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc)		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

IWFM.L and IWF have a correlation of 0.54, 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 0.25% for IWFM.L.

IWFM.L is categorized as Momentum, while IWF is Large Cap Growth Equities. IWFM.L tracks MSCI World Momentum Index, while IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for IWFM.L and 0.18% for IWF.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWFM.L and IWF

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