IWM vs. DFSCX
IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and DFSCX (DFA U.S. Micro Cap Portfolio) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 11.27%/yr vs 11.53%/yr for DFSCX. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.41%/yr for DFSCX.
Performance
IWM vs. DFSCX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IWM having a 19.22% return and DFSCX slightly higher at 19.26%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWM having a 11.27% annualized return and DFSCX not far ahead at 11.53%.
IWM
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- 2.99%
- YTD
- 19.22%
- 6M
- 16.00%
- 1Y
- 41.75%
- 3Y*
- 17.23%
- 5Y*
- 6.07%
- 10Y*
- 11.27%
DFSCX
- 1D
- 2.35%
- 1M
- 6.42%
- YTD
- 19.26%
- 6M
- 16.19%
- 1Y
- 38.65%
- 3Y*
- 17.49%
- 5Y*
- 9.29%
- 10Y*
- 11.53%
IWM vs. DFSCX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 19.22% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -11.12% | 14.58% |
DFSCX DFA U.S. Micro Cap Portfolio | 19.26% | 9.65% | 11.43% | 17.93% | -12.49% | 33.70% | 6.61% | 20.68% | -11.60% | 10.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWM and DFSCX is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2000 | 0.95 |
The correlation between IWM and DFSCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
IWM vs. DFSCX — Risk / Return Rank
IWM
DFSCX
IWM vs. DFSCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and DFA U.S. Micro Cap Portfolio (DFSCX). 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.
| IWM | DFSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.34 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.57 | 4.37 | -0.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.63 | 14.12 | -1.49 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWM vs. DFSCX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, smaller than the maximum DFSCX drawdown of -63.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and DFSCX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWM | DFSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.05% | -63.07% | +4.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.03% | -8.17% | -2.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.50% | -27.01% | -0.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.91% | -27.01% | -4.90% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.13% | -46.88% | +5.75% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.76% | -9.90% | -0.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.12% | 2.53% | +0.59% |
Volatility
IWM vs. DFSCX - Volatility Comparison
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 7.16% compared to DFA U.S. Micro Cap Portfolio (DFSCX) at 5.02%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFSCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWM | DFSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.16% | 5.02% | +2.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.29% | 11.99% | +2.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.73% | 17.79% | +1.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.61% | 21.05% | +1.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.08% | 22.65% | +0.43% |
IWM vs. DFSCX - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than DFSCX's 0.41% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWM vs. DFSCX - Dividend Comparison
IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, more than DFSCX's 0.80% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DFSCX DFA U.S. Micro Cap Portfolio | 0.80% | 1.03% | 0.97% | 2.48% | 5.16% | 10.77% | 0.87% | 2.80% | 5.50% | 5.05% | 0.90% | 6.33% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.87% | 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
With a correlation of 0.94, IWM and DFSCX 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.
IWM has higher volatility (7.16%) compared to DFSCX (5.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs DFSCX's -63.07%.
DFSCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 1.99), 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 IWM and DFSCX
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