IWM vs. HDV
IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and HDV (iShares Core High Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while HDV is a Dividend fund tracking the Morningstar Dividend Yield Focus Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 11.40%/yr vs 9.36%/yr for HDV. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for HDV.
Performance
IWM vs. HDV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 20.19% return, which is significantly higher than HDV's 14.11% return. Over the past 10 years, IWM has outperformed HDV with an annualized return of 11.40%, while HDV has yielded a comparatively lower 9.36% 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%
HDV
- 1D
- -1.03%
- 1M
- 1.04%
- YTD
- 14.11%
- 6M
- 13.57%
- 1Y
- 20.60%
- 3Y*
- 14.34%
- 5Y*
- 10.83%
- 10Y*
- 9.36%
IWM vs. HDV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
HDV iShares Core High Dividend ETF | 14.11% | 11.90% | 14.16% | 1.72% | 7.05% | 19.45% | -6.48% | 20.22% | -3.01% | 13.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWM and HDV is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2011 | 0.64 |
Over the past year, the correlation between IWM and HDV has dropped to 0.27 - well below their long-term average of 0.64, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
IWM vs. HDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWM
HDV
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
-
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Technology
IWM
HDV
Industrials
IWM
HDV
Healthcare
IWM
HDV
Financial Services
IWM
HDV
Consumer Cyclical
IWM
HDV
Real Estate
IWM
HDV
-
Energy
IWM
HDV
Basic Materials
IWM
HDV
Utilities
IWM
HDV
Communication Services
IWM
HDV
Consumer Defensive
IWM
HDV
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. HDV — Risk / Return Rank
IWM
HDV
IWM vs. HDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV). 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 | HDV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.36 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.91 | 4.00 | -0.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.84 | 11.07 | +2.76 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWM vs. HDV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than HDV's maximum drawdown of -37.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and HDV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWM | HDV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.05% | -37.04% | -22.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.03% | -5.18% | -5.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.50% | -10.49% | -17.01% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.91% | -15.42% | -16.49% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.13% | -37.04% | -4.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.31% | +1.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.75% | -3.08% | -7.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.11% | 1.87% | +1.24% |
Volatility
IWM vs. HDV - Volatility Comparison
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 7.17% compared to iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV) at 3.28%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWM | HDV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.17% | 3.28% | +3.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.27% | 7.53% | +6.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.67% | 9.79% | +9.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.62% | 12.84% | +9.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.09% | 15.74% | +7.35% |
IWM vs. HDV - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than HDV's 0.08% 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. HDV - Dividend Comparison
IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, less than HDV's 3.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HDV iShares Core High Dividend ETF | 3.56% | 3.22% | 3.67% | 3.82% | 3.56% | 3.47% | 4.07% | 3.27% | 3.67% | 3.27% | 3.28% | 3.92% |
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 HDV have a correlation of 0.27, 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 HDV (3.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs HDV's -37.04%.
On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 11.40% vs 9.36% for HDV. On fees, HDV is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, HDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 11.40% return vs 9.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
HDV is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.
HDV has the higher dividend yield at 3.56%, compared with 1.10% for IWM.
IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while HDV is Dividend. IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while HDV tracks Morningstar Dividend Yield Focus Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.08% for HDV.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 2.12), 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 HDV
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