IWR vs. COMT
IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and COMT (iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWR is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Index, while COMT is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll (USD) Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWR returned 11.55%/yr vs 8.63%/yr for COMT. Their 0.31 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IWR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for COMT.
Performance
IWR vs. COMT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWR achieves a 17.29% return, which is significantly lower than COMT's 29.49% return. Over the past 10 years, IWR has outperformed COMT with an annualized return of 11.55%, while COMT has yielded a comparatively lower 8.63% annualized return.
IWR
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 1.54%
- 6M
- 12.63%
- YTD
- 17.29%
- 1Y
- 21.71%
- 3Y*
- 16.46%
- 5Y*
- 8.39%
- 10Y*
- 11.55%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.05%
COMT
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- 5.25%
- 6M
- 19.23%
- YTD
- 29.49%
- 1Y
- 33.46%
- 3Y*
- 10.63%
- 5Y*
- 11.85%
- 10Y*
- 8.63%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.30%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $6.13M | $10.19M | $11.89M | |
| $160.57M | $263.69M | $223.25M |
IWR vs. COMT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWR iShares Russell Midcap ETF | 17.29% | 10.37% | 15.21% | 17.05% | -17.48% | 22.44% | 16.93% | 30.23% | -9.10% | 18.25% |
COMT iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF | 29.49% | 6.07% | 5.96% | -6.56% | 19.45% | 36.88% | -18.66% | 10.81% | -6.67% | 11.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWR and COMT is -0.19, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.19 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.00 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.14 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 16, 2014 | 0.31 |
The correlation between IWR and COMT shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to 0.31 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. COMT — Risk / Return Rank
IWR
COMT
IWR vs. COMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF (COMT). 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 | COMT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.27 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.67 | 1.91 | +0.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.37 | 5.84 | +4.54 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWR vs. COMT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, which is greater than COMT's maximum drawdown of -51.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and COMT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWR | COMT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.78% | -51.89% | -6.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.17% | -17.57% | +9.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.09% | -17.57% | -3.52% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.18% | -29.00% | +2.82% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.59% | -39.22% | -1.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.55% | -11.75% | +11.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.75% | -23.89% | +16.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.10% | 5.75% | -3.65% |
Volatility
IWR vs. COMT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) is 3.22%, while iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF (COMT) has a volatility of 5.13%. This indicates that IWR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWR | COMT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.22% | 5.13% | -1.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.32% | 18.95% | -8.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.65% | 21.64% | -7.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.25% | 21.09% | -2.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.32% | 18.86% | +0.46% |
IWR vs. COMT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWR has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than COMT's 0.48% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWR vs. COMT - Dividend Comparison
IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, less than COMT's 5.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COMT iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF | 5.98% | 7.74% | 4.90% | 5.19% | 29.79% | 17.79% | 0.36% | 2.61% | 11.65% | 5.16% | 0.52% | 1.44% |
IWR iShares Russell Midcap ETF | 1.13% | 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
IWR and COMT have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COMT has higher volatility (5.13%) compared to IWR (3.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs COMT's -51.89%.
On 10-year performance, IWR leads with 11.55% vs 8.63% for COMT. On fees, IWR is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IWR has performed better with a 11.55% return vs 8.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWR is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for COMT.
COMT has the higher dividend yield at 5.98%, compared with 1.13% for IWR.
IWR is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while COMT is Commodities. IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while COMT tracks S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll (USD) Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWR and 0.48% for COMT.
IWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 1.55), 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 COMT
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