IWL vs. IBIT
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT).
IWL and IBIT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IWL is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell Top 200 Index. It was launched on Sep 22, 2009. IBIT is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant. It was launched on Jan 5, 2024. Both IWL and IBIT are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
IWL vs. IBIT - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
IWL vs. IBIT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF | -5.75% | 19.09% | 26.43% |
IBIT iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF | -22.62% | -6.41% | 99.21% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWL achieves a -5.75% return, which is significantly higher than IBIT's -22.62% return.
IWL
- 1D
- 2.87%
- 1M
- -5.05%
- YTD
- -5.75%
- 6M
- -2.93%
- 1Y
- 17.90%
- 3Y*
- 19.47%
- 5Y*
- 12.23%
- 10Y*
- 14.77%
IBIT
- 1D
- 1.96%
- 1M
- 3.31%
- YTD
- -22.62%
- 6M
- -40.89%
- 1Y
- -17.92%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
IWL vs. IBIT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than IBIT's 0.25% 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%.
Return for Risk
IWL vs. IBIT — Risk / Return Rank
IWL
IBIT
IWL vs. IBIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT). 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.
| IWL | IBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.97 | -0.40 | +1.37 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.49 | -0.29 | +1.78 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 0.97 | +0.26 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.57 | -0.39 | +1.96 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.89 | -0.83 | +7.72 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IWL | IBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.97 | -0.40 | +1.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.82 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.83 | 0.35 | +0.47 |
Correlation
The correlation between IWL and IBIT is 0.39, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
IWL vs. IBIT - Dividend Comparison
IWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, while IBIT has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF | 0.96% | 0.90% | 1.04% | 1.30% | 1.54% | 1.12% | 1.30% | 1.96% | 1.93% | 1.69% | 1.96% | 2.14% |
IBIT iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
IWL vs. IBIT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWL drawdown since its inception was -32.71%, smaller than the maximum IBIT drawdown of -49.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWL and IBIT.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWL | IBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.71% | -49.36% | +16.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.81% | -49.36% | +37.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.65% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.71% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.24% | -46.11% | +38.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.91% | -14.13% | +10.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.69% | 23.09% | -20.40% |
Volatility
IWL vs. IBIT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) is 5.36%, while iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) has a volatility of 12.99%. This indicates that IWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| IWL | IBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.36% | 12.99% | -7.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.69% | 36.75% | -27.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.48% | 45.42% | -26.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.17% | 51.26% | -34.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.06% | 51.26% | -33.20% |