PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWM vs. DSI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWM vs. DSI

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and DSI (iShares MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while DSI is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI KLD 400 Social Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 11.40%/yr vs 15.60%/yr for DSI. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for DSI.

Performance

IWM vs. DSI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and iShares MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF (DSI). 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 20.19% return, which is significantly higher than DSI's 11.83% return. Over the past 10 years, IWM has underperformed DSI with an annualized return of 11.40%, while DSI has yielded a comparatively higher 15.60% annualized return.

IWM

1D
0.82%
1M
6.39%
YTD
20.19%
6M
17.83%
1Y
42.91%
3Y*
17.97%
5Y*
6.41%
10Y*
11.40%

DSI

1D
1.78%
1M
2.10%
YTD
11.83%
6M
12.35%
1Y
29.36%
3Y*
20.81%
5Y*
13.33%
10Y*
15.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWM vs. DSI - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		20.19%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%
DSI
iShares MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF		11.83%18.03%22.38%28.51%-21.71%31.32%20.94%31.15%-3.90%20.89%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and DSI is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.76

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.75

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.80

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2006

0.81

The correlation between IWM and DSI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWM vs. DSI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWM
DSI

Technology

19.2%
43.1%

Industrials

17.9%
8.0%

Healthcare

16.3%
7.0%

Financial Services

15.4%
10.1%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
8.0%

Real Estate

5.9%
2.6%

Energy

5.4%
1.5%

Basic Materials

4.7%
2.2%

Utilities

2.7%
0.9%

Communication Services

2.5%
12.8%

Consumer Defensive

2.2%
4.0%

Technology

IWM
19.2%
DSI
43.1%

Industrials

IWM
17.9%
DSI
8.0%

Healthcare

IWM
16.3%
DSI
7.0%

Financial Services

IWM
15.4%
DSI
10.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWM
7.9%
DSI
8.0%

Real Estate

IWM
5.9%
DSI
2.6%

Energy

IWM
5.4%
DSI
1.5%

Basic Materials

IWM
4.7%
DSI
2.2%

Utilities

IWM
2.7%
DSI
0.9%

Communication Services

IWM
2.5%
DSI
12.8%

Consumer Defensive

IWM
2.2%
DSI
4.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

iShares MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF

Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. TNA
Often compared with DSI:
DSI vs. SPYDSI vs. VOODSI vs. FSLEXDSI vs. XSUS.TODSI vs. VTIDSI vs. QQQDSI vs. SPYG

Return for Risk

IWM vs. DSI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
DSI
DSI Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
DSI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DSI Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
DSI Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
DSI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
DSI Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
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. DSI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and iShares MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF (DSI). 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.

IWMDSIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.20
2.17

+0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.99
2.93

+0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.39

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.91

2.67

+1.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.84

11.05

+2.78

IWM vs. DSI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the DSI Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and DSI, 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. DSI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than DSI's maximum drawdown of -54.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and DSI.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWMDSIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.05%

-54.23%

-4.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.03%

-11.05%

+0.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.50%

-20.58%

-6.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.91%

-28.36%

-3.55%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

-34.10%

-7.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.51%

+0.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.75%

-7.51%

-3.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.11%

2.66%

+0.45%

Volatility

IWM vs. DSI - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 7.17% compared to iShares MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF (DSI) at 5.40%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DSI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWMDSIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.17%

5.40%

+1.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.27%

10.95%

+3.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.67%

13.65%

+6.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.62%

18.02%

+4.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.09%

18.76%

+4.33%

IWM vs. DSI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than DSI's 0.25% 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. DSI - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, more than DSI's 1.04% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DSI
iShares MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF		1.04%0.92%1.03%1.19%1.39%0.99%1.22%1.40%1.63%1.28%1.51%1.46%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		1.10%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

IWM and DSI have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWM has higher volatility (7.17%) compared to DSI (5.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs DSI's -54.23%.

On 10-year performance, DSI leads with 15.60% vs 11.40% for IWM. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, DSI has been the lower-risk option at 5.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DSI has performed better with a 15.60% return vs 11.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for DSI.

IWM has the higher dividend yield at 1.10%, compared with 1.04% for DSI.

IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while DSI is Large Cap Growth Equities. IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while DSI tracks MSCI KLD 400 Social Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.25% for DSI.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 2.17), 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 DSI

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