IWM vs. VOOG
IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) and VOOG (Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index, while VOOG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWM returned 10.78%/yr vs 17.80%/yr for VOOG. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWM charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for VOOG.
Performance
IWM vs. VOOG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWM achieves a 15.62% return, which is significantly higher than VOOG's 10.10% return. Over the past 10 years, IWM has underperformed VOOG with an annualized return of 10.78%, while VOOG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.80% 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%
VOOG
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- -0.20%
- YTD
- 10.10%
- 6M
- 9.55%
- 1Y
- 29.06%
- 3Y*
- 26.66%
- 5Y*
- 15.20%
- 10Y*
- 17.80%
IWM vs. VOOG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
VOOG Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF | 10.10% | 22.11% | 35.89% | 29.96% | -29.48% | 31.95% | 33.35% | 30.93% | -0.21% | 27.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWM and VOOG is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2010 | 0.76 |
The correlation between IWM and VOOG shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (3 years) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
IWM vs. VOOG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWM
VOOG
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Technology
IWM
VOOG
Industrials
IWM
VOOG
Healthcare
IWM
VOOG
Financial Services
IWM
VOOG
Consumer Cyclical
IWM
VOOG
Energy
IWM
VOOG
Real Estate
IWM
VOOG
Basic Materials
IWM
VOOG
Utilities
IWM
VOOG
Consumer Defensive
IWM
VOOG
Communication Services
IWM
VOOG
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. VOOG — Risk / Return Rank
IWM
VOOG
IWM vs. VOOG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) and Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF (VOOG). 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 | VOOG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.31 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.24 | 2.13 | +1.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.44 | 8.74 | +2.70 |
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 | VOOG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.83 | 1.79 | +0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.24 | 0.72 | -0.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 | 0.86 | -0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 0.89 | -0.53 |
Drawdowns
IWM vs. VOOG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWM drawdown since its inception was -59.05%, which is greater than VOOG's maximum drawdown of -32.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWM and VOOG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWM | VOOG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.05% | -32.73% | -26.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.03% | -13.71% | +2.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.50% | -22.18% | -5.32% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.91% | -32.73% | +0.82% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.13% | -32.73% | -8.40% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.71% | -4.28% | +1.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.76% | -4.97% | -5.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.11% | 3.33% | -0.22% |
Volatility
IWM vs. VOOG - Volatility Comparison
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a higher volatility of 6.52% compared to Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF (VOOG) at 5.61%. This indicates that IWM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VOOG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWM | VOOG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.52% | 5.61% | +0.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.00% | 13.04% | +0.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.53% | 16.31% | +3.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.58% | 21.25% | +1.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.07% | 20.77% | +2.30% |
IWM vs. VOOG - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWM has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than VOOG's 0.07% 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. VOOG - Dividend Comparison
IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, more than VOOG's 0.45% 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% |
VOOG Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF | 0.45% | 0.49% | 0.49% | 1.12% | 0.93% | 0.53% | 0.88% | 1.26% | 1.34% | 1.32% | 1.47% | 1.56% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWM and VOOG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWM has higher volatility (6.52%) compared to VOOG (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWM dropped -59.05% vs VOOG's -32.73%.
On 10-year performance, VOOG leads with 17.80% vs 10.78% for IWM. On fees, VOOG is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, VOOG has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, VOOG has performed better with a 17.80% return vs 10.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VOOG is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.
IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.89%, compared with 0.45% for VOOG.
IWM is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while VOOG is S&P 500. IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index, while VOOG tracks S&P 500 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWM and 0.07% for VOOG.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.79), 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.
Find the right allocation for IWM and VOOG
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