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

Performance

IWM vs. UGA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). 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 20.47% return, which is significantly lower than UGA's 64.09% return. Over the past 10 years, IWM has underperformed UGA with an annualized return of 11.58%, while UGA has yielded a comparatively higher 14.31% annualized return.


IWM

1D
-0.96%
1M
3.82%
YTD
20.47%
6M
17.64%
1Y
40.90%
3Y*
19.22%
5Y*
6.27%
10Y*
11.58%

UGA

1D
-1.12%
1M
-12.11%
YTD
64.09%
6M
60.42%
1Y
59.74%
3Y*
18.95%
5Y*
22.69%
10Y*
14.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWM vs. UGA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
20.47%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
64.09%-2.00%3.77%1.27%46.34%68.49%-24.88%41.25%-28.07%1.69%

Correlation

The correlation between IWM and UGA is -0.20, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.20

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

-0.02

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

0.11

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

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2008

0.25

The correlation between IWM and UGA shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to 0.25 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. UGA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

UGA
UGA Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
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. UGA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA). 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.


IWMUGADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.30

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.73

3.17

+0.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.18

9.39

+3.79

IWM vs. UGA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWM Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the UGA Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWM and UGA, 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...

Drawdowns

IWM vs. UGA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, smaller than the maximum UGA drawdown of -86.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and UGA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWMUGADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.05%

-86.59%

+27.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.03%

-18.96%

+7.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.50%

-26.68%

-0.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.91%

-38.11%

+6.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.13%

-75.89%

+34.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.96%

-18.05%

+17.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.75%

-36.69%

+25.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.11%

6.43%

-3.32%

Volatility

IWM vs. UGA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is 6.56%, while United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) has a volatility of 9.24%. This indicates that IWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UGA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWMUGADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.56%

9.24%

-2.68%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.31%

30.57%

-16.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.74%

35.22%

-15.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.61%

34.45%

-11.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.06%

37.22%

-14.16%

IWM vs. UGA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than UGA's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWM vs. UGA - Dividend Comparison

IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, while UGA has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
0.90%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
UGA
United States Gasoline Fund LP
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 UGA have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UGA has higher volatility (9.24%) compared to IWM (6.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs UGA's -86.59%.

On 10-year performance, UGA leads with 14.31% vs 11.58% for IWM. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 6.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, UGA has performed better with a 14.31% return vs 11.58%. 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 0.75% for UGA.

IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.00% for UGA.

IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while UGA is Oil & Gas. IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.75% for UGA.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.73), 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 UGA

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