IWP vs. DFIV

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and DFIV (Dimensional International Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWP is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Growth Index, while DFIV is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional. IWP is passively managed, while DFIV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IWP returned 14.57%/yr vs 23.38%/yr for DFIV. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWP charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for DFIV.

Performance

IWP vs. DFIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWP achieves a 2.86% return, which is significantly lower than DFIV's 12.20% return.

IWP

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 3.23%
• YTD: 2.86%
• 6M: 1.29%
• 1Y: 4.54%
• 3Y*: 14.57%
• 5Y*: 5.82%
• 10Y*: 12.47%

DFIV

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 12.20%
• 6M: 13.92%
• 1Y: 33.45%
• 3Y*: 23.38%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IWP vs. DFIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	2.86%	8.45%	21.86%	25.70%	-26.90%	-1.64%
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	12.20%	45.36%	7.26%	17.75%	-3.70%	0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between IWP and DFIV 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	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2021	0.61

The correlation between IWP and DFIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWP vs. DFIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWP	DFIV
Industrials	24.2%	9.6%
Consumer Cyclical	21.1%	9.6%
Technology	20.0%	2.8%
Healthcare	13.5%	4.9%
Financial Services	6.9%	32.4%
Communication Services	4.2%	4.2%
Energy	3.8%	16.4%
Utilities	2.9%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	4.9%
Real Estate	1.4%	1.8%
Basic Materials	0.4%	10.9%

Return for Risk

IWP vs. DFIV — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWP

IWP Risk / Return Rank: 13
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 14

DFIV

DFIV Risk / Return Rank: 82
DFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
DFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
DFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
DFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
DFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

IWP vs. DFIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). 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.

	IWP	DFIV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.27	2.39	-2.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.50	3.26	-2.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.43	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.31	3.48	-3.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.89	13.34	-12.45

IWP vs. DFIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWP Sharpe Ratio is 0.27, which is lower than the DFIV Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWP and DFIV, 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

IWP vs. DFIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWP drawdown since its inception was -56.92%, which is greater than DFIV's maximum drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWP and DFIV.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWP	DFIV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.92%	-25.42%	-31.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.79%	-9.66%	-5.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.20%	-14.72%	-10.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.95%	-0.43%	-2.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.68%	-4.46%	-5.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.10%	2.52%	+2.58%

Volatility

IWP vs. DFIV - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) has a higher volatility of 5.68% compared to Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) at 4.50%. This indicates that IWP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWP	DFIV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.68%	4.50%	+1.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.34%	11.46%	+1.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.03%	14.10%	+2.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.37%	16.66%	+5.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.71%	16.66%	+5.05%

IWP vs. DFIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWP has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than DFIV's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IWP vs. DFIV - Dividend Comparison

IWP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, less than DFIV's 2.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	2.54%	2.92%	3.88%	3.93%	3.84%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.33%	0.37%	0.40%	0.54%	0.77%	0.30%	0.38%	0.59%	1.02%	0.78%	1.16%	0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWP and DFIV in my portfolio?

IWP and DFIV 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.

Which is riskier, IWP or DFIV?

IWP has higher volatility (5.68%) compared to DFIV (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWP dropped -56.92% vs DFIV's -25.42%.

Which ETF is better, IWP or DFIV?

On 3-year performance, DFIV leads with 23.38% vs 14.57% for IWP. On fees, IWP is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, DFIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWP or DFIV?

Over the 3-year period, DFIV has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 14.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWP or DFIV?

IWP is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for DFIV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWP or DFIV?

DFIV has the higher dividend yield at 2.54%, compared with 0.33% for IWP.

What is the main difference between IWP and DFIV?

IWP is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while DFIV is Foreign Large Cap Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Dimensional. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IWP and 0.27% for DFIV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 0.27), 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.