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

Performance

IWM vs. FLKR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF (FLKR). 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 15.62% return, which is significantly lower than FLKR's 86.43% return.


IWM

1D
0.87%
1M
-0.02%
YTD
15.62%
6M
13.83%
1Y
35.52%
3Y*
16.64%
5Y*
5.48%
10Y*
10.78%

FLKR

1D
6.28%
1M
-2.80%
YTD
86.43%
6M
95.63%
1Y
177.77%
3Y*
43.23%
5Y*
16.65%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWM vs. FLKR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
15.62%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%2.86%
FLKR
Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
86.43%91.91%-18.84%19.16%-27.50%-7.54%42.64%8.88%-21.30%2.84%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and FLKR is 0.51, 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

0.51

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

0.51

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017

0.54

The correlation between IWM and FLKR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWM vs. FLKR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWM
FLKR

Technology

19.5%
64.3%

Industrials

17.2%
12.8%

Healthcare

16.1%
2.5%

Financial Services

15.6%
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
6.0%

Energy

5.8%
0.4%

Real Estate

5.6%

-

Basic Materials

4.5%
2.6%

Utilities

3.0%
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.1%
1.5%

Communication Services

2.1%
1.6%

Technology

IWM
19.5%
FLKR
64.3%

Industrials

IWM
17.2%
FLKR
12.8%

Healthcare

IWM
16.1%
FLKR
2.5%

Financial Services

IWM
15.6%
FLKR
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

IWM
7.9%
FLKR
6.0%

Energy

IWM
5.8%
FLKR
0.4%

Real Estate

IWM
5.6%
FLKR

-

Basic Materials

IWM
4.5%
FLKR
2.6%

Utilities

IWM
3.0%
FLKR
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

IWM
2.1%
FLKR
1.5%

Communication Services

IWM
2.1%
FLKR
1.6%

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. FLKR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

FLKR
FLKR Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
FLKR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLKR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLKR Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
FLKR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLKR Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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. FLKR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF (FLKR). 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.


IWMFLKRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.57

-0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.24

7.77

-4.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.44

27.92

-16.48

IWM vs. FLKR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is lower than the FLKR Sharpe Ratio of 4.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and FLKR, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IWMFLKRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.83

4.03

-2.20

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

0.57

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

0.47

-0.11

Drawdowns

IWM vs. FLKR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than FLKR's maximum drawdown of -50.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and FLKR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWMFLKRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.05%

-50.06%

-8.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.03%

-23.03%

+12.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.50%

-26.39%

-1.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.91%

-49.51%

+17.60%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.71%

-14.59%

+11.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.76%

-22.06%

+11.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.11%

6.40%

-3.29%

Volatility

IWM vs. FLKR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is 6.52%, while Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF (FLKR) has a volatility of 26.26%. This indicates that IWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLKR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWMFLKRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.52%

26.26%

-19.74%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.00%

40.64%

-26.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.53%

44.43%

-24.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.58%

29.12%

-6.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.07%

28.11%

-5.04%

IWM vs. FLKR - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than FLKR's 0.09% 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

IWM vs. FLKR - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, less than FLKR's 2.07% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLKR
Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
2.07%3.87%7.08%2.28%3.13%2.12%0.99%2.09%1.86%1.02%0.00%0.00%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
0.89%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 FLKR have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLKR has higher volatility (26.26%) compared to IWM (6.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs FLKR's -50.06%.

On 5-year performance, FLKR leads with 16.65% vs 5.48% for IWM. On fees, FLKR is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 6.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FLKR has performed better with a 16.65% return vs 5.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLKR is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

FLKR has the higher dividend yield at 2.07%, compared with 0.89% for IWM.

IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while FLKR is Asia Pacific Equities. IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while FLKR tracks FTSE South Korea RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.09% for FLKR.

FLKR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.03 vs 1.83), 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 FLKR

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