IWM vs. IWN

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and IWN (iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while IWN is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 10.97%/yr vs 10.19%/yr for IWN. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.24%/yr for IWN.

Performance

IWM vs. IWN - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IWM having a 18.84% return and IWN slightly higher at 19.00%. Over the past 10 years, IWM has outperformed IWN with an annualized return of 10.97%, while IWN has yielded a comparatively lower 10.19% annualized return.

IWM

• 1D: 1.51%
• 1M: 3.34%
• YTD: 18.84%
• 6M: 16.56%
• 1Y: 41.60%
• 3Y*: 19.00%
• 5Y*: 6.43%
• 10Y*: 10.97%

IWN

• 1D: 1.34%
• 1M: 2.59%
• YTD: 19.00%
• 6M: 17.88%
• 1Y: 43.68%
• 3Y*: 18.83%
• 5Y*: 6.76%
• 10Y*: 10.19%

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

IWM vs. IWN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	18.84%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-20.48%	14.54%	20.03%	25.39%	-11.12%	14.58%
IWN iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF	19.00%	12.40%	7.63%	14.56%	-14.77%	27.96%	4.66%	22.01%	-13.01%	7.69%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and IWN is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2000	0.96

The correlation between IWM and IWN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWM vs. IWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWM	IWN
Technology	19.5%	12.4%
Industrials	17.1%	11.1%
Financial Services	15.8%	24.2%
Healthcare	15.8%	8.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	8.7%
Energy	6.0%	9.2%
Real Estate	5.7%	10.2%
Basic Materials	4.5%	5.4%
Utilities	3.0%	5.7%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	2.0%
Communication Services	2.0%	1.6%

Return for Risk

IWM vs. IWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 68
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 73

IWN

IWN Risk / Return Rank: 80
IWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
IWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
IWN Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
IWN Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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. IWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN). 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	IWN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.18	2.47	-0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.00	3.44	-0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.42	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.79	5.19	-1.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.45	17.45	-4.00
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. IWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is comparable to the IWN Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and IWN, 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	IWN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.18	2.47	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	0.32	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48	0.44	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.39	-0.02

Drawdowns

IWM vs. IWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, roughly equal to the maximum IWN drawdown of -61.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and IWN.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWM	IWN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.05%	-61.55%	+2.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.03%	-8.45%	-2.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.50%	-26.70%	-0.80%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.91%	-26.70%	-5.21%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.13%	-46.08%	+4.95%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-0.15%	+0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.77%	-10.15%	-0.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	2.51%	+0.59%

Volatility

IWM vs. IWN - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 5.70% compared to iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) at 4.88%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWM	IWN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.70%	4.88%	+0.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.60%	11.91%	+1.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.19%	17.79%	+1.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.53%	21.44%	+1.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.04%	23.39%	-0.35%

IWM vs. IWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than IWN's 0.24% 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. IWN - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than IWN's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.87%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%
IWN iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF	1.44%	1.70%	1.80%	2.04%	2.12%	1.48%	1.60%	1.92%	1.99%	1.78%	1.74%	2.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWM and IWN in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, IWM and IWN 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 IWN?

IWM has higher volatility (5.70%) compared to IWN (4.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs IWN's -61.55%.

Which ETF is better, IWM or IWN?

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.97% vs 10.19% for IWN. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWN has been the lower-risk option at 4.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWM or IWN?

Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.97% return vs 10.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWM or IWN?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for IWN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWM or IWN?

IWN has the higher dividend yield at 1.44%, compared with 0.87% for IWM.

What is the main difference between IWM and IWN?

IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while IWN is Small Cap Value Equities. IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while IWN tracks Russell 2000 Value Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.24% for IWN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 2.18), 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.