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

Performance

IWM vs. IWC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC). 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 17.07% return, which is significantly lower than IWC's 18.97% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWM having a 10.93% annualized return and IWC not far ahead at 11.35%.


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%

IWC

1D
-2.09%
1M
2.88%
YTD
18.97%
6M
18.63%
1Y
55.24%
3Y*
21.73%
5Y*
5.45%
10Y*
11.35%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWM vs. IWC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
IWC
iShares Micro-Cap ETF
18.97%22.45%13.63%8.99%-21.93%18.67%20.88%22.20%-13.13%12.79%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and IWC is 0.94, 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

0.94

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

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 17, 2005

0.96

The correlation between IWM and IWC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWM vs. IWC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWM
IWC

Technology

19.5%
18.4%

Industrials

17.1%
13.3%

Financial Services

15.8%
18.1%

Healthcare

15.8%
28.1%

Consumer Cyclical

7.8%
5.3%

Energy

6.0%
4.7%

Real Estate

5.7%
3.5%

Basic Materials

4.5%
4.4%

Utilities

3.0%
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

2.1%
1.9%

Communication Services

2.0%
1.8%

Technology

IWM
19.5%
IWC
18.4%

Industrials

IWM
17.1%
IWC
13.3%

Financial Services

IWM
15.8%
IWC
18.1%

Healthcare

IWM
15.8%
IWC
28.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWM
7.8%
IWC
5.3%

Energy

IWM
6.0%
IWC
4.7%

Real Estate

IWM
5.7%
IWC
3.5%

Basic Materials

IWM
4.5%
IWC
4.4%

Utilities

IWM
3.0%
IWC
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

IWM
2.1%
IWC
1.9%

Communication Services

IWM
2.0%
IWC
1.8%

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. IWC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

IWC
IWC Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
IWC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWC Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
IWC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWC Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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. IWC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC). 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.


IWMIWCDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.05

2.36

-0.30

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.85

3.10

-0.25

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.37

-0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.56

4.47

-0.90

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.64

14.76

-2.12

IWM vs. IWC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the IWC Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and IWC, 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


IWMIWCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.05

2.36

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

0.22

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

0.47

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

0.31

+0.05

Drawdowns

IWM vs. IWC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, smaller than the maximum IWC drawdown of -64.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and IWC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWMIWCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.05%

-64.61%

+5.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.03%

-12.43%

+1.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.50%

-29.46%

+1.96%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.91%

-40.68%

+8.77%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

-47.21%

+6.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.49%

-2.90%

+1.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.77%

-15.28%

+4.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.10%

3.75%

-0.65%

Volatility

IWM vs. IWC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is 5.75%, while iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC) has a volatility of 7.29%. This indicates that IWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWMIWCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.75%

7.29%

-1.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.53%

17.26%

-3.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.20%

23.63%

-4.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.52%

24.42%

-1.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.04%

24.42%

-1.38%

IWM vs. IWC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than IWC's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWM vs. IWC - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than IWC's 0.91% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWC
iShares Micro-Cap ETF
0.91%1.10%1.06%1.17%1.18%0.78%0.98%1.19%1.01%1.09%1.16%1.49%
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


With a correlation of 0.94, IWM and IWC 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.

IWC has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to IWM (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs IWC's -64.61%.

On 10-year performance, IWC leads with 11.35% vs 10.93% for IWM. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 5.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWC has performed better with a 11.35% return vs 10.93%. 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 0.60% for IWC.

IWC has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while IWC tracks Russell Microcap Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.60% for IWC.

IWC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 2.05), 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 IWC

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