IWP vs. SCHM
IWP (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and SCHM (Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - IWP tracks the Russell Midcap Growth Index while SCHM tracks the Dow Jones US Total Stock Market Mid-Cap. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWP returned 12.40%/yr vs 11.37%/yr for SCHM. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWP charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHM.
Performance
IWP vs. SCHM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWP achieves a 3.75% return, which is significantly lower than SCHM's 19.05% return. Over the past 10 years, IWP has outperformed SCHM with an annualized return of 12.40%, while SCHM has yielded a comparatively lower 11.37% annualized 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%
SCHM
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 5.28%
- YTD
- 19.05%
- 6M
- 19.54%
- 1Y
- 32.45%
- 3Y*
- 18.14%
- 5Y*
- 8.07%
- 10Y*
- 11.37%
IWP vs. SCHM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF | 19.05% | 10.17% | 11.98% | 16.69% | -17.07% | 19.36% | 15.26% | 27.48% | -8.77% | 19.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWP and SCHM is 0.84, 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 | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 14, 2011 | 0.92 |
The correlation between IWP and SCHM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWP vs. SCHM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWP
SCHM
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Communication Services
Energy
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Industrials
IWP
SCHM
Consumer Cyclical
IWP
SCHM
Technology
IWP
SCHM
Healthcare
IWP
SCHM
Financial Services
IWP
SCHM
Communication Services
IWP
SCHM
Energy
IWP
SCHM
Utilities
IWP
SCHM
Consumer Defensive
IWP
SCHM
Real Estate
IWP
SCHM
Basic Materials
IWP
SCHM
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. SCHM — Risk / Return Rank
IWP
SCHM
IWP vs. SCHM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) and Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM). 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 | SCHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.34 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.36 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 3.50 | -3.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.12 | 14.11 | -13.00 |
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 | SCHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 | 2.09 | -1.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 | 0.41 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | 0.56 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.43 | 0.59 | -0.16 |
Drawdowns
IWP vs. SCHM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWP drawdown since its inception was -56.92%, which is greater than SCHM's maximum drawdown of -42.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWP and SCHM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWP | SCHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.92% | -42.43% | -14.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.79% | -9.32% | -5.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.20% | -23.27% | -1.93% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.62% | -26.46% | -12.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.62% | -42.43% | +3.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.10% | -0.03% | -2.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.68% | -5.66% | -4.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.06% | 2.31% | +2.75% |
Volatility
IWP vs. SCHM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) is 3.73%, while Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM) has a volatility of 4.72%. This indicates that IWP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWP | SCHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.73% | 4.72% | -0.99% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.62% | 11.74% | +0.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.50% | 15.62% | +0.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.31% | 19.56% | +2.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.67% | 20.46% | +1.21% |
IWP vs. SCHM - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWP has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHM's 0.04% 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. SCHM - Dividend Comparison
IWP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, less than SCHM's 1.22% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF | 1.22% | 1.46% | 1.43% | 1.50% | 1.67% | 1.13% | 1.31% | 1.48% | 1.56% | 1.27% | 1.51% | 1.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWP and SCHM have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SCHM has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to IWP (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWP dropped -56.92% vs SCHM's -42.43%.
On 10-year performance, IWP leads with 12.40% vs 11.37% for SCHM. On fees, SCHM is cheaper at 0.04% 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 10-year period, IWP has performed better with a 12.40% return vs 11.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHM is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for IWP.
SCHM has the higher dividend yield at 1.22%, compared with 0.33% for IWP.
IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index, while SCHM tracks Dow Jones US Total Stock Market Mid-Cap. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IWP and 0.04% for SCHM.
SCHM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 0.34), 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 SCHM
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