PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWL vs. DYNF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWL vs. DYNF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF (DYNF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWL achieves a 9.79% return, which is significantly lower than DYNF's 12.25% return.


IWL

1D
1.85%
1M
1.65%
YTD
9.79%
6M
10.53%
1Y
27.79%
3Y*
22.12%
5Y*
14.51%
10Y*
16.52%

DYNF

1D
2.16%
1M
2.71%
YTD
12.25%
6M
12.86%
1Y
31.46%
3Y*
25.36%
5Y*
15.35%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWL vs. DYNF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF
9.79%19.09%27.12%29.77%-19.89%27.79%22.10%16.53%
DYNF
iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF
12.25%20.00%30.29%36.25%-20.27%22.12%13.47%14.75%

Correlation

The correlation between IWL and DYNF is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.98

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

0.97

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2019

0.97

The correlation between IWL and DYNF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWL vs. DYNF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWL
DYNF

Technology

41.8%
40.1%

Communication Services

12.1%
10.7%

Financial Services

11.1%
14.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
7.1%

Healthcare

8.5%
6.1%

Industrials

6.3%
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

4.5%
1.7%

Energy

2.4%
5.0%

Basic Materials

1.4%
0.8%

Utilities

1.2%
2.8%

Real Estate

0.9%
2.0%

Technology

IWL
41.8%
DYNF
40.1%

Communication Services

IWL
12.1%
DYNF
10.7%

Financial Services

IWL
11.1%
DYNF
14.9%

Consumer Cyclical

IWL
9.7%
DYNF
7.1%

Healthcare

IWL
8.5%
DYNF
6.1%

Industrials

IWL
6.3%
DYNF
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWL
4.5%
DYNF
1.7%

Energy

IWL
2.4%
DYNF
5.0%

Basic Materials

IWL
1.4%
DYNF
0.8%

Utilities

IWL
1.2%
DYNF
2.8%

Real Estate

IWL
0.9%
DYNF
2.0%

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

IWL vs. DYNF — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWL
IWL Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
IWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWL Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
IWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWL Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

DYNF
DYNF Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
DYNF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DYNF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
DYNF Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
DYNF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
DYNF Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

IWL vs. DYNF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF (DYNF). 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.


IWLDYNFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.43

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.84

3.65

-0.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.27

17.10

-4.83

IWL vs. DYNF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWL Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the DYNF Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWL and DYNF, 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

IWL vs. DYNF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWL drawdown since its inception was -32.71%, smaller than the maximum DYNF drawdown of -34.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWL and DYNF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWLDYNFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.71%

-34.72%

+2.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.83%

-8.67%

-1.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.15%

-18.70%

-0.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.65%

-28.65%

+3.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.04%

0.00%

-1.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.88%

-5.96%

+2.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.27%

1.85%

+0.42%

Volatility

IWL vs. DYNF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) is 4.80%, while iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF (DYNF) has a volatility of 5.25%. This indicates that IWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DYNF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWLDYNFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.80%

5.25%

-0.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.03%

10.57%

-0.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.77%

13.14%

-0.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.26%

17.61%

-0.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.13%

19.92%

-1.79%

IWL vs. DYNF - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than DYNF's 0.26% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IWL vs. DYNF - Dividend Comparison

IWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than DYNF's 1.06% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DYNF
iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF
1.06%1.01%0.65%1.11%1.66%2.89%1.52%1.22%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF
1.04%0.90%1.04%1.30%1.54%1.12%1.30%1.96%1.93%1.69%1.96%2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, IWL and DYNF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

DYNF has higher volatility (5.25%) compared to IWL (4.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWL dropped -32.71% vs DYNF's -34.72%.

On 5-year performance, DYNF leads with 15.35% vs 14.51% for IWL. On fees, IWL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IWL has been the lower-risk option at 4.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, DYNF has performed better with a 15.35% return vs 14.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.26% for DYNF.

DYNF has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 1.04% for IWL.

IWL is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while DYNF is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWL and 0.26% for DYNF.

DYNF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 2.19), 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 IWL and DYNF

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