PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWP vs. NUMG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWP vs. NUMG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWP achieves a 3.75% return, which is significantly higher than NUMG's -0.40% return.


IWP

1D
-1.05%
1M
4.11%
YTD
3.75%
6M
2.84%
1Y
5.63%
3Y*
15.88%
5Y*
6.59%
10Y*
12.40%

NUMG

1D
-1.63%
1M
5.76%
YTD
-0.40%
6M
0.31%
1Y
-0.49%
3Y*
8.47%
5Y*
0.99%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWP vs. NUMG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
3.75%8.45%21.86%25.70%-26.90%12.60%35.25%35.04%-4.89%24.93%
NUMG
Nuveen ESG Mid-Cap Growth ETF
-0.40%0.78%11.99%20.47%-28.31%12.27%45.73%34.87%-5.79%19.00%

Correlation

The correlation between IWP and NUMG is 0.90, 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

0.90

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.93

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2016

0.92

The correlation between IWP and NUMG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWP vs. NUMG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWP
NUMG

Industrials

24.2%
26.5%

Consumer Cyclical

21.1%
11.8%

Technology

20.0%
28.7%

Healthcare

13.5%
13.9%

Financial Services

6.9%
6.5%

Communication Services

4.2%
5.2%

Energy

3.8%

-

Utilities

2.9%
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.5%

-

Real Estate

1.4%
3.7%

Basic Materials

0.4%
2.3%

Industrials

IWP
24.2%
NUMG
26.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IWP
21.1%
NUMG
11.8%

Technology

IWP
20.0%
NUMG
28.7%

Healthcare

IWP
13.5%
NUMG
13.9%

Financial Services

IWP
6.9%
NUMG
6.5%

Communication Services

IWP
4.2%
NUMG
5.2%

Energy

IWP
3.8%
NUMG

-

Utilities

IWP
2.9%
NUMG
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWP
1.5%
NUMG

-

Real Estate

IWP
1.4%
NUMG
3.7%

Basic Materials

IWP
0.4%
NUMG
2.3%

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. NUMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWP
IWP Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

NUMG
NUMG Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
NUMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NUMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
NUMG Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
NUMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
NUMG Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank
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. NUMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) and Nuveen ESG Mid-Cap Growth ETF (NUMG). 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.


IWPNUMGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.01

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.38

-0.03

+0.41

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.12

-0.06

+1.18

IWP vs. NUMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWP Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is higher than the NUMG Sharpe Ratio of -0.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWP and NUMG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IWPNUMGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

-0.03

+0.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

0.04

+0.25

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.44

-0.01

Drawdowns

IWP vs. NUMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWP drawdown since its inception was -56.92%, which is greater than NUMG's maximum drawdown of -38.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWP and NUMG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWPNUMGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.92%

-38.85%

-18.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.79%

-19.71%

+4.92%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.20%

-26.58%

+1.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.62%

-38.85%

+0.23%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.10%

-9.34%

+7.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.68%

-11.37%

+1.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.06%

7.59%

-2.53%

Volatility

IWP vs. NUMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) is 3.73%, while Nuveen ESG Mid-Cap Growth ETF (NUMG) has a volatility of 4.75%. This indicates that IWP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NUMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWPNUMGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.73%

4.75%

-1.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.62%

14.59%

-1.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.50%

18.18%

-1.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.31%

22.86%

-0.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.67%

21.87%

-0.20%

IWP vs. NUMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWP has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than NUMG's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWP vs. NUMG - Dividend Comparison

IWP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, more than NUMG's 0.01% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
NUMG
Nuveen ESG Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.01%0.01%0.06%0.18%0.18%12.76%3.82%0.27%5.14%0.56%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWP and NUMG have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NUMG has higher volatility (4.75%) compared to IWP (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWP dropped -56.92% vs NUMG's -38.85%.

On 5-year performance, IWP leads with 6.59% vs 0.99% for NUMG. On fees, IWP is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, IWP has been the lower-risk option at 3.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWP has performed better with a 6.59% return vs 0.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWP is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for NUMG.

IWP has the higher dividend yield at 0.33%, compared with 0.01% for NUMG.

IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index, while NUMG tracks MSCI TIAA ESG USA Mid Cap Growth. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Nuveen. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IWP and 0.30% for NUMG.

IWP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.34 vs -0.03), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWP and NUMG

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