IWP vs. IMCG

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and IMCG (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds from iShares - IWP tracks the Russell Midcap Growth Index while IMCG tracks the Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWP returned 12.76%/yr vs 15.00%/yr for IMCG. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IWP charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for IMCG.

Performance

IWP vs. IMCG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWP achieves a 3.69% return, which is significantly lower than IMCG's 22.43% return. Over the past 10 years, IWP has underperformed IMCG with an annualized return of 12.76%, while IMCG has yielded a comparatively higher 15.00% annualized return.

IWP

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 1.79%
• YTD: 3.69%
• 6M: 1.21%
• 1Y: 6.05%
• 3Y*: 15.53%
• 5Y*: 5.46%
• 10Y*: 12.76%

IMCG

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: 6.84%
• YTD: 22.43%
• 6M: 20.06%
• 1Y: 26.63%
• 3Y*: 19.34%
• 5Y*: 8.31%
• 10Y*: 15.00%

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

IWP vs. IMCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	3.69%	8.45%	21.86%	25.70%	-26.90%	12.60%	35.25%	35.04%	-4.89%	24.93%
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	22.43%	6.55%	18.14%	20.73%	-25.79%	15.39%	45.64%	35.70%	-3.68%	25.57%

Correlation

The correlation between IWP and IMCG is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2004	0.96

The correlation between IWP and IMCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWP vs. IMCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWP	IMCG
Industrials	25.0%	25.3%
Technology	22.3%	34.9%
Consumer Cyclical	19.9%	9.1%
Healthcare	12.8%	6.9%
Financial Services	6.4%	8.6%
Energy	3.9%	1.7%
Communication Services	3.0%	2.4%
Utilities	2.5%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	1.9%	1.2%
Real Estate	1.4%	3.1%
Basic Materials	0.4%	4.3%

Return for Risk

IWP vs. IMCG — 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: 13
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 12
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 14

IMCG

IMCG Risk / Return Rank: 50
IMCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
IMCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
IMCG Omega Ratio Rank: 44
IMCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
IMCG Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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. IMCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG). 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	IMCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.36	1.60	-1.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.62	2.27	-1.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.28	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.41	2.63	-2.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.19	10.03	-8.84

IWP vs. IMCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWP Sharpe Ratio is 0.36, which is lower than the IMCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWP and IMCG, 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. IMCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWP drawdown since its inception was -56.92%, roughly equal to the maximum IMCG drawdown of -58.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWP and IMCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWP	IMCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.92%	-58.96%	+2.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.79%	-10.17%	-4.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.20%	-21.92%	-3.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.62%	-35.08%	-3.54%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.62%	-35.08%	-3.54%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.16%	0.00%	-2.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.67%	-9.21%	-0.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.11%	2.66%	+2.45%

Volatility

IWP vs. IMCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) is 5.63%, while iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) has a volatility of 7.22%. This indicates that IWP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWP	IMCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.63%	7.22%	-1.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.32%	13.99%	-0.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.05%	16.73%	+0.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.39%	20.36%	+2.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.73%	20.61%	+1.12%

IWP vs. IMCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWP has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCG's 0.06% 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. IMCG - Dividend Comparison

IWP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, less than IMCG's 0.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.61%	0.78%	0.78%	0.85%	0.91%	0.41%	0.09%	0.30%	0.35%	0.45%	0.52%	0.38%
IWP iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.35%	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 IMCG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, IWP and IMCG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IWP or IMCG?

IMCG has higher volatility (7.22%) compared to IWP (5.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWP dropped -56.92% vs IMCG's -58.96%.

Which ETF is better, IWP or IMCG?

On 10-year performance, IMCG leads with 15.00% vs 12.76% for IWP. On fees, IMCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IWP has been the lower-risk option at 5.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWP or IMCG?

Over the 10-year period, IMCG has performed better with a 15.00% return vs 12.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWP or IMCG?

IMCG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for IWP.

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

IMCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.61%, compared with 0.35% for IWP.

What is the main difference between IWP and IMCG?

IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index, while IMCG tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IWP and 0.06% for IMCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IMCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 0.36), 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.