IWL vs. VONG
IWL (iShares Russell Top 200 ETF) and VONG (Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - IWL tracks the Russell Top 200 Index while VONG tracks the Russell 1000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWL returned 16.38%/yr vs 18.61%/yr for VONG. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for VONG.
Performance
IWL vs. VONG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWL achieves a 10.03% return, which is significantly higher than VONG's 7.17% return. Over the past 10 years, IWL has underperformed VONG with an annualized return of 16.38%, while VONG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.61% annualized return.
IWL
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- 5.18%
- YTD
- 10.03%
- 6M
- 10.03%
- 1Y
- 28.50%
- 3Y*
- 23.42%
- 5Y*
- 14.59%
- 10Y*
- 16.38%
VONG
- 1D
- -1.32%
- 1M
- 5.68%
- YTD
- 7.17%
- 6M
- 6.52%
- 1Y
- 25.74%
- 3Y*
- 24.92%
- 5Y*
- 15.38%
- 10Y*
- 18.61%
IWL vs. VONG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF | 10.03% | 19.09% | 27.12% | 29.77% | -19.89% | 27.79% | 22.10% | 31.42% | -3.30% | 22.90% |
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF | 7.17% | 18.45% | 33.20% | 42.67% | -29.18% | 27.60% | 38.30% | 36.06% | -1.53% | 30.05% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWL and VONG is 0.96 - 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 | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2010 | 0.92 |
The correlation between IWL and VONG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWL vs. VONG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWL
VONG
Technology
Communication Services
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
IWL
VONG
Communication Services
IWL
VONG
Financial Services
IWL
VONG
Consumer Cyclical
IWL
VONG
Healthcare
IWL
VONG
Industrials
IWL
VONG
Consumer Defensive
IWL
VONG
Energy
IWL
VONG
Utilities
IWL
VONG
Basic Materials
IWL
VONG
Real Estate
IWL
VONG
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. VONG — Risk / Return Rank
IWL
VONG
IWL vs. VONG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG). 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 | VONG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.67 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.90 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.29 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.91 | 1.59 | +1.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.92 | 5.34 | +7.59 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IWL | VONG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.35 | 1.68 | +0.67 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 | 0.72 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.91 | 0.89 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.88 | 0.90 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
IWL vs. VONG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWL drawdown since its inception was -32.71%, roughly equal to the maximum VONG drawdown of -32.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWL and VONG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWL | VONG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.71% | -32.72% | +0.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.83% | -16.23% | +6.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.15% | -23.27% | +4.12% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.65% | -32.72% | +7.07% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.71% | -32.72% | +0.01% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.83% | -1.66% | +0.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.88% | -4.88% | +1.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.21% | 4.83% | -2.62% |
Volatility
IWL vs. VONG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) is 2.98%, while Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) has a volatility of 3.60%. This indicates that IWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VONG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWL | VONG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.98% | 3.60% | -0.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.15% | 11.61% | -2.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.19% | 15.37% | -3.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.17% | 21.33% | -4.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.08% | 20.87% | -2.79% |
IWL vs. VONG - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than VONG's 0.06% 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
IWL vs. VONG - Dividend Comparison
IWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, more than VONG's 0.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWL iShares Russell Top 200 ETF | 0.82% | 0.90% | 1.04% | 1.30% | 1.54% | 1.12% | 1.30% | 1.96% | 1.93% | 1.69% | 1.96% | 2.14% |
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF | 0.43% | 0.45% | 0.55% | 0.71% | 0.98% | 0.58% | 0.77% | 1.03% | 1.18% | 1.19% | 1.48% | 1.47% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, IWL and VONG 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.
VONG has higher volatility (3.60%) compared to IWL (2.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWL dropped -32.71% vs VONG's -32.72%.
On 10-year performance, VONG leads with 18.61% vs 16.38% for IWL. On fees, VONG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, VONG has performed better with a 18.61% return vs 16.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VONG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IWL.
IWL has the higher dividend yield at 0.82%, compared with 0.43% for VONG.
IWL tracks Russell Top 200 Index, while VONG tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWL and 0.06% for VONG.
IWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.68), 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.
Find the right allocation for IWL and VONG
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