IWL vs. RING

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

IWL (iShares Russell Top 200 ETF) and RING (iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Top 200 Index, while RING is a Gold fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWL returned 16.52%/yr vs 14.40%/yr for RING. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RING.

Performance

IWL vs. RING - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWL achieves a 9.79% return, which is significantly higher than RING's 0.45% return. Over the past 10 years, IWL has outperformed RING with an annualized return of 16.52%, while RING has yielded a comparatively lower 14.40% annualized 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%

RING

• 1D: 6.34%
• 1M: -2.70%
• YTD: 0.45%
• 6M: 2.11%
• 1Y: 63.84%
• 3Y*: 47.07%
• 5Y*: 21.24%
• 10Y*: 14.40%

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

IWL vs. RING - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF	9.79%	19.09%	27.12%	29.77%	-19.89%	27.79%	22.10%	31.42%	-3.30%	22.90%
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	0.45%	164.72%	15.98%	12.29%	-15.40%	-7.46%	24.98%	49.92%	-13.14%	10.24%

Correlation

The correlation between IWL and RING is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2012	0.17

Over the past year, IWL and RING have become more correlated (0.38) than their long-term average of 0.17, meaning their price movements have been converging.

IWL vs. RING - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWL	RING
Technology	41.8%	-
Communication Services	12.1%	-
Financial Services	11.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.7%	-
Healthcare	8.5%	-
Industrials	6.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	-
Energy	2.4%	-
Basic Materials	1.4%	100.0%
Utilities	1.2%	-
Real Estate	0.9%	-

Return for Risk

IWL vs. RING — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWL

IWL Risk / Return Rank: 71
IWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
IWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
IWL Omega Ratio Rank: 75
IWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
IWL Martin Ratio Rank: 72

RING

RING Risk / Return Rank: 39
RING Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
RING Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
RING Omega Ratio Rank: 41
RING Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
RING Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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. RING - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING). 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	RING	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	1.35	+0.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	1.75	+1.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.24	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.84	1.80	+1.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.27	5.00	+7.27

IWL vs. RING - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWL Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is higher than the RING Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWL and RING, 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. RING - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWL drawdown since its inception was -32.71%, smaller than the maximum RING drawdown of -79.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWL and RING.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWL	RING	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.71%	-79.47%	+46.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.83%	-35.72%	+25.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.15%	-35.72%	+16.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.65%	-47.94%	+22.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.71%	-52.04%	+19.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.04%	-25.60%	+24.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.88%	-47.36%	+43.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.27%	12.84%	-10.57%

Volatility

IWL vs. RING - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) is 4.80%, while iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) has a volatility of 18.14%. This indicates that IWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RING based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWL	RING	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.80%	18.14%	-13.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.03%	39.41%	-29.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.77%	47.69%	-34.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.26%	36.92%	-19.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.13%	36.73%	-18.60%

IWL vs. RING - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than RING's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWL vs. RING - Dividend Comparison

IWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than RING's 1.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	1.56%	0.84%	1.43%	2.01%	2.29%	2.38%	0.83%	0.83%	0.70%	0.42%	1.41%	0.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWL and RING in my portfolio?

IWL and RING have a correlation of 0.38, 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 RING?

RING has higher volatility (18.14%) compared to IWL (4.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWL dropped -32.71% vs RING's -79.47%.

Which ETF is better, IWL or RING?

On 10-year performance, IWL leads with 16.52% vs 14.40% for RING. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, IWL or RING?

Over the 10-year period, IWL has performed better with a 16.52% return vs 14.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWL or RING?

IWL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RING.

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

RING has the higher dividend yield at 1.56%, compared with 1.04% for IWL.

What is the main difference between IWL and RING?

IWL is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while RING is Gold. IWL tracks Russell Top 200 Index, while RING tracks MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWL and 0.39% for RING.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 1.35), 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.