IWM vs. METL
IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and METL (Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while METL is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Sprott. IWM is passively managed, while METL is actively managed. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for METL.
Performance
IWM vs. METL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 15.62% return, which is significantly higher than METL's 7.51% 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%
METL
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- -9.97%
- YTD
- 7.51%
- 6M
- 15.84%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWM vs. METL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 15.62% | 4.76% |
METL Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF | 7.51% | 27.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWM and METL is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 11, 2025 | 0.61 |
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. METL — Risk / Return Rank
IWM
METL
IWM vs. METL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF (METL). 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 | METL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.24 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.44 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IWM | METL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.83 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.24 | — | — |
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 | 1.18 | -0.81 |
Drawdowns
IWM vs. METL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than METL's maximum drawdown of -27.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and METL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWM | METL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.05% | -27.39% | -31.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.03% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.50% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.91% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.13% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.71% | -18.48% | +15.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.76% | -8.24% | -2.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.11% | — | — |
Volatility
IWM vs. METL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWM | METL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.52% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.00% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.53% | 44.85% | -25.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.58% | 44.85% | -22.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.07% | 44.85% | -21.78% |
IWM vs. METL - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than METL's 0.89% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWM vs. METL - Dividend Comparison
IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, less than METL's 0.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
METL Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF | 0.92% | 0.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWM and METL have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for METL.
METL has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.89% for IWM.
IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while METL is Commodity Producers Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Sprott. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.89% for METL.
Find the right allocation for IWM and METL
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