IWM vs. ASCE

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and ASCE (Allspring SMID Core ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. IWM is passively managed, while ASCE is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for ASCE.

Performance

IWM vs. ASCE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Allspring SMID Core ETF (ASCE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 17.07% return, which is significantly lower than ASCE's 22.72% return.

IWM

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: 3.52%
• YTD: 17.07%
• 6M: 15.83%
• 1Y: 39.10%
• 3Y*: 17.88%
• 5Y*: 6.11%
• 10Y*: 10.93%

ASCE

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: 5.53%
• YTD: 22.72%
• 6M: 23.54%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWM vs. ASCE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	11.95%
ASCE Allspring SMID Core ETF	22.72%	8.61%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and ASCE is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2025	0.90

Return for Risk

IWM vs. ASCE — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 62
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

IWM vs. ASCE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Allspring SMID Core ETF (ASCE). 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.

	IWM	ASCE	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.64	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWM	ASCE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	1.95	-1.59

Drawdowns

IWM vs. ASCE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than ASCE's maximum drawdown of -9.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and ASCE.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWM	ASCE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.05%	-9.22%	-49.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.50%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.13%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.49%	0.00%	-1.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.77%	-2.10%	-8.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IWM	ASCE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.75%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.53%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.20%	19.29%	-0.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.52%	19.29%	+3.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.04%	19.29%	+3.75%

IWM vs. ASCE - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ASCE's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWM vs. ASCE - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, more than ASCE's 0.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASCE Allspring SMID Core ETF	0.18%	0.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.88%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWM and ASCE in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, IWM and ASCE 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.

Which ETF is better, IWM or ASCE?

On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWM or ASCE?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for ASCE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWM or ASCE?

IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.18% for ASCE.

What is the main difference between IWM and ASCE?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Allspring. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.38% for ASCE.