IWR vs. IWB

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWR is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Index, while IWB is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWR returned 11.41%/yr vs 14.97%/yr for IWB. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for IWB.

Performance

IWR vs. IWB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWR achieves a 10.71% return, which is significantly higher than IWB's 8.46% return. Over the past 10 years, IWR has underperformed IWB with an annualized return of 11.41%, while IWB has yielded a comparatively higher 14.97% annualized return.

IWR

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 1.05%
• YTD: 10.71%
• 6M: 10.50%
• 1Y: 19.23%
• 3Y*: 16.25%
• 5Y*: 7.68%
• 10Y*: 11.41%

IWB

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: 0.43%
• YTD: 8.46%
• 6M: 8.45%
• 1Y: 23.94%
• 3Y*: 21.07%
• 5Y*: 12.59%
• 10Y*: 14.97%

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

IWR vs. IWB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IWR iShares Russell Midcap ETF	10.71%	10.37%	15.21%	17.05%	-17.48%	22.44%	16.93%	30.23%	-9.10%	18.25%
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	8.46%	17.18%	24.32%	26.39%	-19.19%	26.32%	20.77%	31.06%	-4.90%	21.52%

Correlation

The correlation between IWR and IWB is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2001	0.93

The correlation between IWR and IWB shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (1 year) to 0.93 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWR vs. IWB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWR	IWB
Industrials	18.4%	8.6%
Technology	17.2%	36.6%
Financial Services	12.5%	11.3%
Consumer Cyclical	11.2%	10.0%
Healthcare	8.7%	8.6%
Energy	7.2%	3.3%
Real Estate	7.0%	2.1%
Utilities	6.1%	2.5%
Basic Materials	4.3%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	4.5%
Communication Services	3.4%	10.4%

Return for Risk

IWR vs. IWB — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWR

IWR Risk / Return Rank: 49
IWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
IWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 43
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 57

IWB

IWB Risk / Return Rank: 66
IWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
IWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
IWB Omega Ratio Rank: 66
IWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
IWB Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

IWR vs. IWB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB). 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.

	IWR	IWB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	1.98	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	2.68	-0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.36	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.37	2.71	-0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.09	12.38	-3.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWR vs. IWB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWR Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the IWB Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWR and IWB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWR	IWB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	1.98	-0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42	0.74	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59	0.83	-0.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.49	0.45	+0.04

Drawdowns

IWR vs. IWB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, which is greater than IWB's maximum drawdown of -55.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and IWB.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWR	IWB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.78%	-55.38%	-3.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.17%	-8.86%	+0.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.09%	-19.09%	-2.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.18%	-25.20%	-0.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.59%	-34.60%	-5.99%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.04%	-2.58%	+0.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.80%	-10.85%	+3.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	1.94%	+0.18%

Volatility

IWR vs. IWB - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) have volatilities of 3.59% and 3.74%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWR	IWB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.59%	3.74%	-0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.06%	9.37%	+0.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.54%	12.20%	+1.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.25%	17.14%	+1.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.38%	18.16%	+1.22%

IWR vs. IWB - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWR has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than IWB's 0.15% 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. IWB - Dividend Comparison

IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, more than IWB's 0.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	0.93%	1.00%	1.14%	1.31%	1.56%	1.09%	1.37%	1.71%	2.06%	1.64%	1.89%	1.95%
IWR iShares Russell Midcap ETF	1.17%	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

Can I hold both IWR and IWB in my portfolio?

IWR and IWB have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IWR or IWB?

IWB has higher volatility (3.74%) compared to IWR (3.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs IWB's -55.38%.

Which ETF is better, IWR or IWB?

On 10-year performance, IWB leads with 14.97% vs 11.41% for IWR. On fees, IWB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWR or IWB?

Over the 10-year period, IWB has performed better with a 14.97% return vs 11.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWR or IWB?

IWB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWR or IWB?

IWR has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 0.93% for IWB.

What is the main difference between IWR and IWB?

IWR is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while IWB is Large Cap Blend Equities. IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWR and 0.15% for IWB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs 1.43), 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.