PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWM vs. MEUD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWM vs. MEUD.L

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and MEUD.L (Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while MEUD.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Europe NR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 10.78%/yr vs 9.79%/yr for MEUD.L. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for MEUD.L.

Performance

IWM vs. MEUD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc (MEUD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IWM is traded in USD, while MEUD.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the MEUD.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 15.62% return, which is significantly higher than MEUD.L's 5.24% return. Over the past 10 years, IWM has outperformed MEUD.L with an annualized return of 10.78%, while MEUD.L has yielded a comparatively lower 9.79% annualized 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%

MEUD.L

1D
0.11%
1M
0.08%
YTD
5.24%
6M
8.76%
1Y
16.91%
3Y*
16.48%
5Y*
8.35%
10Y*
9.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWM vs. MEUD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		15.62%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%
MEUD.L
Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc		5.24%36.05%1.93%19.47%-15.19%16.00%7.03%25.23%-14.71%26.41%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and MEUD.L is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.54

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.48

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2013

0.48

The correlation between IWM and MEUD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWM vs. MEUD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWM
MEUD.L

Technology

19.5%
9.4%

Industrials

17.2%
20.3%

Healthcare

16.1%
12.6%

Financial Services

15.6%
23.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
7.1%

Energy

5.8%
5.3%

Real Estate

5.6%
1.2%

Basic Materials

4.5%
5.1%

Utilities

3.0%
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

2.1%
7.7%

Communication Services

2.1%
3.0%

Technology

IWM
19.5%
MEUD.L
9.4%

Industrials

IWM
17.2%
MEUD.L
20.3%

Healthcare

IWM
16.1%
MEUD.L
12.6%

Financial Services

IWM
15.6%
MEUD.L
23.9%

Consumer Cyclical

IWM
7.9%
MEUD.L
7.1%

Energy

IWM
5.8%
MEUD.L
5.3%

Real Estate

IWM
5.6%
MEUD.L
1.2%

Basic Materials

IWM
4.5%
MEUD.L
5.1%

Utilities

IWM
3.0%
MEUD.L
4.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWM
2.1%
MEUD.L
7.7%

Communication Services

IWM
2.1%
MEUD.L
3.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc

Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. IWO
Often compared with MEUD.L:
MEUD.L vs. SMEA.LMEUD.L vs. XSX6.LMEUD.L vs. VEUA.LMEUD.L vs. SPYMEUD.L vs. HMEU.LMEUD.L vs. VUAA.LMEUD.L vs. CS51.L

Return for Risk

IWM vs. MEUD.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank
MEUD.L
MEUD.L Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
MEUD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
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. MEUD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc (MEUD.L). 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.

IWMMEUD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.83
1.16

+0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.54
1.71

+0.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.21

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.24

1.46

+1.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.44

5.19

+6.25

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. MEUD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is higher than the MEUD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and MEUD.L, 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

IWMMEUD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.83

1.16

+0.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

0.44

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.51

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

0.35

+0.01

Drawdowns

IWM vs. MEUD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than MEUD.L's maximum drawdown of -36.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and MEUD.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWMMEUD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.05%

-36.31%

-22.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.03%

-11.53%

+0.50%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.50%

-14.53%

-12.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.91%

-32.40%

+0.49%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

-36.31%

-4.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.71%

-2.76%

+0.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.76%

-9.39%

-1.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.11%

3.25%

-0.14%

Volatility

IWM vs. MEUD.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 6.52% compared to Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc (MEUD.L) at 3.92%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MEUD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWMMEUD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.52%

3.92%

+2.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.00%

12.01%

+1.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.53%

14.58%

+4.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.58%

19.16%

+3.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.07%

19.37%

+3.70%

IWM vs. MEUD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than MEUD.L's 0.15% 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. MEUD.L - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, while MEUD.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
MEUD.L
Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc		0.00%0.00%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 MEUD.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MEUD.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MEUD.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while MEUD.L is Europe Equities. IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while MEUD.L tracks MSCI Europe NR EUR. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.15% for MEUD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWM and MEUD.L

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