IWO vs. FSGS

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

IWO (iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF) and FSGS (First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - IWO tracks the Russell 2000 Growth Index while FSGS tracks the SMID Growth Strength Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWO returned 5.77%/yr vs 5.01%/yr for FSGS. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IWO charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for FSGS.

Performance

IWO vs. FSGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWO achieves a 20.41% return, which is significantly higher than FSGS's 10.71% return.

IWO

• 1D: 2.68%
• 1M: 0.41%
• 6M: 14.89%
• YTD: 20.41%
• 1Y: 33.81%
• 3Y*: 17.15%
• 5Y*: 5.77%
• 10Y*: 10.96%
• ALL TIME*: 7.07%

FSGS

• 1D: 2.07%
• 1M: 4.77%
• 6M: 10.03%
• YTD: 10.71%
• 1Y: 10.71%
• 3Y*: 7.80%
• 5Y*: 5.01%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.80%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF	$36.35K	$33.59K	$77.26K
IWO iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF	$179.14M	$160.12M	$166.50M

IWO vs. FSGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWO iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF	20.41%	12.90%	15.04%	18.51%	-26.27%	2.54%	34.68%	28.48%	-9.43%	11.78%
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF	10.71%	2.41%	6.38%	15.98%	-13.17%	25.56%	10.26%	21.31%	-11.92%	10.39%

Correlation

The correlation between IWO and FSGS is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2017	0.77

The correlation between IWO and FSGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.84 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWO vs. FSGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWO	FSGS
Healthcare	28.9%	17.8%
Technology	22.1%	17.5%
Industrials	15.9%	22.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.2%	7.8%
Financial Services	8.0%	19.7%
Basic Materials	5.0%	1.7%
Energy	4.8%	3.8%
Real Estate	2.4%	0.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	5.1%
Communication Services	1.9%	2.8%
Utilities	0.6%	-

Return for Risk

IWO vs. FSGS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IWO

IWO Risk / Return Rank: 55
IWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
IWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
IWO Omega Ratio Rank: 49
IWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
IWO Martin Ratio Rank: 59

FSGS

FSGS Risk / Return Rank: 27
FSGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FSGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
FSGS Omega Ratio Rank: 24
FSGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
FSGS Martin Ratio Rank: 28

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IWO vs. FSGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). 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.

	IWO	FSGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	0.71	+0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	1.12	+1.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.13	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.28	0.95	+1.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.84	2.66	+5.18

IWO vs. FSGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWO Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is higher than the FSGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWO and FSGS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IWO vs. FSGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWO drawdown since its inception was -60.11%, which is greater than FSGS's maximum drawdown of -43.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWO and FSGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWO	FSGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.11%	-43.26%	-16.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.87%	-11.31%	-3.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.57%	-24.08%	-4.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.51%	-24.08%	-16.43%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.02%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	0.00%	-1.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.62%	-7.92%	-8.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.33%	4.03%	+0.30%

Volatility

IWO vs. FSGS - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF (IWO) has a higher volatility of 6.69% compared to First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) at 4.53%. This indicates that IWO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FSGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWO	FSGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.69%	4.53%	+2.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.25%	11.21%	+6.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.51%	15.28%	+7.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.67%	20.00%	+4.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.20%	22.68%	+1.52%

IWO vs. FSGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWO has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than FSGS's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWO vs. FSGS - Dividend Comparison

IWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, more than FSGS's 0.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF	0.03%	0.00%	2.71%	2.29%	1.95%	1.35%	1.32%	1.77%	2.13%	1.15%	0.00%	0.00%
IWO iShares Russell 2000 Growth ETF	0.42%	0.56%	0.80%	0.73%	0.73%	0.32%	0.44%	0.71%	0.76%	0.73%	0.97%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWO and FSGS in my portfolio?

IWO and FSGS have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWO or FSGS?

IWO has higher volatility (6.69%) compared to FSGS (4.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWO dropped -60.11% vs FSGS's -43.26%.

Which ETF is better, IWO or FSGS?

On 5-year performance, IWO leads with 5.77% vs 5.01% for FSGS. On fees, IWO is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 4.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWO or FSGS?

Over the 5-year period, IWO has performed better with a 5.77% return vs 5.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWO or FSGS?

IWO is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FSGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWO or FSGS?

IWO has the higher dividend yield at 0.42%, compared with 0.03% for FSGS.

What is the main difference between IWO and FSGS?

IWO tracks Russell 2000 Growth Index, while FSGS tracks SMID Growth Strength Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for IWO and 0.60% for FSGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.52 vs 0.71), 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.