IWL vs. QWLD

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

IWL (iShares Russell Top 200 ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - IWL tracks the Russell Top 200 Index while QWLD tracks the MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWL returned 15.89%/yr vs 11.57%/yr for QWLD. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IWL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.

Performance

IWL vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWL achieves a 8.65% return, which is significantly lower than QWLD's 9.39% return. Over the past 10 years, IWL has outperformed QWLD with an annualized return of 15.89%, while QWLD has yielded a comparatively lower 11.57% annualized return.

IWL

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: 0.06%
• 6M: 7.61%
• YTD: 8.65%
• 1Y: 20.97%
• 3Y*: 20.19%
• 5Y*: 13.23%
• 10Y*: 15.89%
• ALL TIME*: 14.62%

QWLD

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 1.63%
• 6M: 6.46%
• YTD: 9.39%
• 1Y: 19.11%
• 3Y*: 15.49%
• 5Y*: 10.03%
• 10Y*: 11.57%
• ALL TIME*: 10.49%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF	$7.92M	$7.26M	$9.02M
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	$231.12K	$297.84K	$1.04M

IWL vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF	8.65%	19.09%	27.12%	29.77%	-19.89%	27.79%	22.10%	31.42%	-3.30%	22.90%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	9.39%	17.93%	14.44%	19.59%	-13.30%	21.57%	10.24%	27.59%	-7.02%	22.44%

Correlation

The correlation between IWL and QWLD is 0.80, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.89
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2014	0.74

The correlation between IWL and QWLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (all time) to 0.89 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWL vs. QWLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWL	QWLD
Technology	40.8%	24.9%
Financial Services	12.2%	16.5%
Communication Services	10.5%	9.5%
Healthcare	9.0%	13.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	6.3%
Industrials	7.2%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	8.1%
Energy	2.7%	3.4%
Utilities	1.7%	3.8%
Basic Materials	1.3%	2.5%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.0%

Return for Risk

IWL vs. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWL

IWL Risk / Return Rank: 59
IWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
IWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
IWL Omega Ratio Rank: 58
IWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
IWL Martin Ratio Rank: 64

QWLD

QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 80
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 82
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

IWL vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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.

	IWL	QWLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.93	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	2.75	-0.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.34	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.92	2.44	-0.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.71	10.67	-2.97

IWL vs. QWLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWL Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the QWLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWL and QWLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IWL vs. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWL drawdown since its inception was -32.71%, roughly equal to the maximum QWLD drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWL and QWLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWL	QWLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.71%	-31.89%	-0.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.83%	-7.66%	-2.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.15%	-12.40%	-6.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.65%	-22.84%	-2.81%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.71%	-31.89%	-0.82%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	0.00%	-2.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.87%	-3.66%	-0.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.44%	1.75%	+0.69%

Volatility

IWL vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) has a higher volatility of 4.00% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.30%. This indicates that IWL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWL	QWLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.00%	2.30%	+1.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.53%	7.73%	+2.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.35%	9.71%	+3.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.32%	13.51%	+3.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.12%	15.12%	+3.00%

IWL vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWL vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison

IWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, less than QWLD's 1.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF	0.85%	0.90%	1.04%	1.30%	1.54%	1.12%	1.30%	1.96%	1.93%	1.69%	1.96%	2.14%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	1.79%	1.85%	1.74%	1.78%	2.02%	1.77%	1.77%	2.13%	2.33%	2.73%	2.22%	3.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWL and QWLD in my portfolio?

IWL and QWLD have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWL or QWLD?

IWL has higher volatility (4.00%) compared to QWLD (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWL dropped -32.71% vs QWLD's -31.89%.

Which ETF is better, IWL or QWLD?

On 10-year performance, IWL leads with 15.89% vs 11.57% for QWLD. On fees, IWL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWL or QWLD?

Over the 10-year period, IWL has performed better with a 15.89% return vs 11.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWL or QWLD?

IWL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for QWLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWL or QWLD?

QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 0.85% for IWL.

What is the main difference between IWL and QWLD?

IWL tracks Russell Top 200 Index, while QWLD tracks MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWL and 0.30% for QWLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.41), 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.