IWR vs. BKMC
IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and BKMC (BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWR is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Index, while BKMC is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWR returned 8.04%/yr vs 7.66%/yr for BKMC. Their 0.97 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together. IWR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for BKMC.
Performance
IWR vs. BKMC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWR achieves a 14.55% return, which is significantly higher than BKMC's 11.65% return.
IWR
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- -0.59%
- 6M
- 11.19%
- YTD
- 14.55%
- 1Y
- 20.25%
- 3Y*
- 14.75%
- 5Y*
- 8.04%
- 10Y*
- 11.43%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.95%
BKMC
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- -1.34%
- 6M
- 6.36%
- YTD
- 11.65%
- 1Y
- 19.28%
- 3Y*
- 13.19%
- 5Y*
- 7.66%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 15.39%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.12M | $1.07M | $1.01M | |
| $186.41M | $266.84M | $222.00M |
IWR vs. BKMC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWR iShares Russell Midcap ETF | 14.55% | 10.37% | 15.21% | 17.05% | -17.48% | 22.44% | 49.79% |
BKMC BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF | 11.65% | 8.74% | 13.78% | 17.50% | -16.03% | 23.83% | 46.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWR and BKMC is 0.96 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.98 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 9, 2020 | 0.97 |
The correlation between IWR and BKMC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWR vs. BKMC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWR
BKMC
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Utilities
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Technology
IWR
BKMC
Industrials
IWR
BKMC
Financial Services
IWR
BKMC
Healthcare
IWR
BKMC
Consumer Cyclical
IWR
BKMC
Real Estate
IWR
BKMC
Utilities
IWR
BKMC
Energy
IWR
BKMC
Consumer Defensive
IWR
BKMC
Basic Materials
IWR
BKMC
Communication Services
IWR
BKMC
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
IWR vs. BKMC — Risk / Return Rank
IWR
BKMC
IWR vs. BKMC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF (BKMC). 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.
| IWR | BKMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.21 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.28 | 1.80 | +0.48 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.85 | 6.81 | +2.05 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWR vs. BKMC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, which is greater than BKMC's maximum drawdown of -25.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and BKMC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWR | BKMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.78% | -25.02% | -33.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.17% | -9.82% | +1.65% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.09% | -23.68% | +2.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.18% | -25.02% | -1.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.59% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.93% | -2.30% | +1.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.76% | -6.42% | -1.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.10% | 2.59% | -0.49% |
Volatility
IWR vs. BKMC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) is 2.48%, while BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF (BKMC) has a volatility of 3.36%. This indicates that IWR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BKMC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWR | BKMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.48% | 3.36% | -0.88% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.17% | 11.16% | -0.99% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.67% | 15.38% | -1.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.22% | 18.80% | -0.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.31% | 19.04% | +0.27% |
IWR vs. BKMC - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWR has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than BKMC'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
IWR vs. BKMC - Dividend Comparison
IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, less than BKMC's 1.42% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BKMC BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF | 1.42% | 1.35% | 1.54% | 1.38% | 1.63% | 1.15% | 0.86% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IWR iShares Russell Midcap ETF | 1.16% | 1.29% | 1.27% | 1.43% | 1.59% | 1.04% | 1.28% | 1.43% | 1.98% | 1.52% | 1.72% | 1.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, IWR and BKMC 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.
BKMC has higher volatility (3.36%) compared to IWR (2.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs BKMC's -25.02%.
On 5-year performance, IWR leads with 8.04% vs 7.66% for BKMC. On fees, BKMC is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 2.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IWR has performed better with a 8.04% return vs 7.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BKMC is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWR.
BKMC has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 1.16% for IWR.
IWR is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while BKMC is Mid Cap Growth Equities. IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while BKMC tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWR and 0.04% for BKMC.
IWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 1.15), 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 IWR and BKMC
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