PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWM vs. DFSTX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWM vs. DFSTX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and DFA U.S. Small Cap Portfolio (DFSTX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 19.22% return, which is significantly higher than DFSTX's 15.82% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWM having a 11.27% annualized return and DFSTX not far behind at 11.16%.


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%

DFSTX

1D
2.42%
1M
5.56%
YTD
15.82%
6M
13.14%
1Y
31.26%
3Y*
15.72%
5Y*
8.14%
10Y*
11.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWM vs. DFSTX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
DFSTX
DFA U.S. Small Cap Portfolio
15.82%8.07%11.50%17.66%-13.50%30.50%11.19%21.78%-13.20%11.19%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and DFSTX is 0.95, 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

0.95

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

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2000

0.97

The correlation between IWM and DFSTX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 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. DFSTX — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

DFSTX
DFSTX Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
DFSTX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFSTX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFSTX Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
DFSTX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFSTX Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank
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. DFSTX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and DFA U.S. Small Cap Portfolio (DFSTX). 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.


IWMDFSTXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.29

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.57

3.15

+0.41

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.63

10.70

+1.93

IWM vs. DFSTX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.99, which is comparable to the DFSTX Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and DFSTX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IWM vs. DFSTX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, roughly equal to the maximum DFSTX drawdown of -60.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and DFSTX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWMDFSTXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.05%

-60.99%

+1.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.03%

-9.16%

-1.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.50%

-25.91%

-1.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.91%

-25.91%

-6.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

-44.78%

+3.65%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.76%

-8.76%

-2.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.12%

2.70%

+0.42%

Volatility

IWM vs. DFSTX - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 7.16% compared to DFA U.S. Small Cap Portfolio (DFSTX) at 5.10%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFSTX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWMDFSTXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.16%

5.10%

+2.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.29%

12.02%

+2.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.73%

17.03%

+2.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.61%

20.61%

+2.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.08%

22.09%

+0.99%

IWM vs. DFSTX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than DFSTX's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IWM vs. DFSTX - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than DFSTX's 0.94% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DFSTX
DFA U.S. Small Cap Portfolio
0.94%1.08%1.05%2.45%5.18%6.39%1.08%3.30%5.16%4.56%3.10%5.90%
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 0.95, IWM and DFSTX 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 DFSTX (5.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs DFSTX's -60.99%.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.70), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWM and DFSTX

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