IWP vs. IEFA
IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and IEFA (iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWP is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Growth Index, while IEFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWP returned 12.22%/yr vs 9.37%/yr for IEFA. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWP charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IEFA.
Performance
IWP vs. IEFA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWP achieves a 1.66% return, which is significantly lower than IEFA's 7.49% return. Over the past 10 years, IWP has outperformed IEFA with an annualized return of 12.22%, while IEFA has yielded a comparatively lower 9.37% annualized return.
IWP
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 1.28%
- YTD
- 1.66%
- 6M
- 0.18%
- 1Y
- 2.82%
- 3Y*
- 15.01%
- 5Y*
- 5.99%
- 10Y*
- 12.22%
IEFA
- 1D
- 0.63%
- 1M
- -1.17%
- YTD
- 7.49%
- 6M
- 10.04%
- 1Y
- 19.61%
- 3Y*
- 16.13%
- 5Y*
- 7.82%
- 10Y*
- 9.37%
IWP vs. IEFA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 1.66% | 8.45% | 21.86% | 25.70% | -26.90% | 12.60% | 35.25% | 35.04% | -4.89% | 24.93% |
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | 7.49% | 32.08% | 3.26% | 17.95% | -15.24% | 11.63% | 8.18% | 22.64% | -14.14% | 26.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWP and IEFA is 0.64, 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 | 0.64 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2012 | 0.72 |
The correlation between IWP and IEFA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWP vs. IEFA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWP
IEFA
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Communication Services
Energy
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Industrials
IWP
IEFA
Consumer Cyclical
IWP
IEFA
Technology
IWP
IEFA
Healthcare
IWP
IEFA
Financial Services
IWP
IEFA
Communication Services
IWP
IEFA
Energy
IWP
IEFA
Utilities
IWP
IEFA
Consumer Defensive
IWP
IEFA
Real Estate
IWP
IEFA
Basic Materials
IWP
IEFA
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
IWP vs. IEFA — Risk / Return Rank
IWP
IEFA
IWP vs. IEFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) and iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA). 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.
| IWP | IEFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 1.24 | -0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.19 | 1.71 | -1.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.56 | 6.52 | -5.96 |
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
| IWP | IEFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.17 | 1.30 | -1.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.27 | 0.47 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | 0.54 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.50 | -0.08 |
Drawdowns
IWP vs. IEFA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWP drawdown since its inception was -56.92%, which is greater than IEFA's maximum drawdown of -34.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWP and IEFA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWP | IEFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.92% | -34.78% | -22.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.79% | -11.50% | -3.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.20% | -13.76% | -11.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.62% | -30.41% | -8.21% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.62% | -34.78% | -3.84% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.08% | -2.44% | -1.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.68% | -6.69% | -2.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.08% | 3.02% | +2.06% |
Volatility
IWP vs. IEFA - Volatility Comparison
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) and iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) have volatilities of 4.62% and 4.54%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWP | IEFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.62% | 4.54% | +0.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.93% | 12.74% | +0.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.71% | 15.22% | +1.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.34% | 16.55% | +5.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.70% | 17.32% | +4.38% |
IWP vs. IEFA - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWP has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than IEFA'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
IWP vs. IEFA - Dividend Comparison
IWP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, less than IEFA's 3.30% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | 3.30% | 3.55% | 3.47% | 3.20% | 2.70% | 3.32% | 1.90% | 3.18% | 3.46% | 2.57% | 2.96% | 2.63% |
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
IWP and IEFA have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWP has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to IEFA (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWP dropped -56.92% vs IEFA's -34.78%.
On 10-year performance, IWP leads with 12.22% vs 9.37% for IEFA. On fees, IEFA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IWP has performed better with a 12.22% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IEFA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for IWP.
IEFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.30%, compared with 0.33% for IWP.
IWP is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while IEFA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index, while IEFA tracks MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IWP and 0.07% for IEFA.
IEFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.30 vs 0.17), 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 IWP and IEFA
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