IWM vs. FSLCX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and FSLCX (Fidelity Small Cap Stock Fund) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 10.93%/yr vs 10.14%/yr for FSLCX. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for FSLCX.

Performance

IWM vs. FSLCX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with IWM having a 17.07% return and FSLCX slightly lower at 16.37%. Over the past 10 years, IWM has outperformed FSLCX with an annualized return of 10.93%, while FSLCX has yielded a comparatively lower 10.14% annualized 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%

FSLCX

• 1D: 1.27%
• 1M: 5.82%
• YTD: 16.37%
• 6M: 15.55%
• 1Y: 33.11%
• 3Y*: 19.16%
• 5Y*: 6.96%
• 10Y*: 10.14%

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

IWM vs. FSLCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-20.48%	14.54%	20.03%	25.39%	-11.12%	14.58%
FSLCX Fidelity Small Cap Stock Fund	16.37%	14.95%	9.27%	19.70%	-22.71%	20.26%	13.80%	29.46%	-11.70%	13.78%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and FSLCX is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2000	0.94

The correlation between IWM and FSLCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IWM vs. FSLCX — 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

FSLCX

FSLCX Risk / Return Rank: 45
FSLCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
FSLCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
FSLCX Omega Ratio Rank: 38
FSLCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
FSLCX Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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. FSLCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Fidelity Small Cap Stock Fund (FSLCX). 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	FSLCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	1.91	+0.14
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	2.77	+0.08
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.33	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	2.80	+0.76
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.64	9.89	+2.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWM vs. FSLCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the FSLCX Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and FSLCX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWM	FSLCX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	1.91	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27	0.33	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48	0.48	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.42	-0.05

Drawdowns

IWM vs. FSLCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, roughly equal to the maximum FSLCX drawdown of -61.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and FSLCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWM	FSLCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.05%	-61.22%	+2.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.03%	-12.51%	+1.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.50%	-22.01%	-5.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.91%	-30.04%	-1.87%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.13%	-45.42%	+4.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.49%	0.00%	-1.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.77%	-9.82%	-0.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	3.54%	-0.44%

Volatility

IWM vs. FSLCX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is 5.75%, while Fidelity Small Cap Stock Fund (FSLCX) has a volatility of 6.16%. This indicates that IWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FSLCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWM	FSLCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.75%	6.16%	-0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.53%	13.79%	-0.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.20%	18.37%	+0.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.52%	20.97%	+1.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.04%	21.23%	+1.81%

IWM vs. FSLCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than FSLCX's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWM vs. FSLCX - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than FSLCX's 12.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FSLCX Fidelity Small Cap Stock Fund	12.81%	14.91%	1.86%	0.02%	7.91%	22.97%	0.00%	0.31%	26.25%	8.92%	3.85%	10.97%
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 FSLCX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, IWM and FSLCX 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 is riskier, IWM or FSLCX?

FSLCX has higher volatility (6.16%) compared to IWM (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs FSLCX's -61.22%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.91), 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.