PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWR vs. IWL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWR vs. IWL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and IWL (iShares Russell Top 200 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWR is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Index, while IWL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Top 200 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWR returned 11.55%/yr vs 16.38%/yr for IWL. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for IWL.

Performance

IWR vs. IWL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWR achieves a 12.43% return, which is significantly higher than IWL's 10.03% return. Over the past 10 years, IWR has underperformed IWL with an annualized return of 11.55%, while IWL has yielded a comparatively higher 16.38% annualized return.

IWR

1D
-0.26%
1M
3.79%
YTD
12.43%
6M
12.21%
1Y
21.66%
3Y*
17.25%
5Y*
8.00%
10Y*
11.55%

IWL

1D
-0.83%
1M
5.18%
YTD
10.03%
6M
10.03%
1Y
28.50%
3Y*
23.42%
5Y*
14.59%
10Y*
16.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWR vs. IWL - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		12.43%10.37%15.21%17.05%-17.48%22.44%16.93%30.23%-9.10%18.25%
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF		10.03%19.09%27.12%29.77%-19.89%27.79%22.10%31.42%-3.30%22.90%

Correlation

The correlation between IWR and IWL is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.70

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

0.75

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

0.84

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2009

0.83

The correlation between IWR and IWL shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.85 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWR vs. IWL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWR
IWL

Industrials

18.4%
6.1%

Technology

17.2%
40.9%

Financial Services

12.5%
11.3%

Consumer Cyclical

11.2%
9.6%

Healthcare

8.7%
8.5%

Energy

7.2%
2.5%

Real Estate

7.0%
1.0%

Utilities

6.1%
1.7%

Basic Materials

4.3%
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
4.7%

Communication Services

3.4%
12.2%

Industrials

IWR
18.4%
IWL
6.1%

Technology

IWR
17.2%
IWL
40.9%

Financial Services

IWR
12.5%
IWL
11.3%

Consumer Cyclical

IWR
11.2%
IWL
9.6%

Healthcare

IWR
8.7%
IWL
8.5%

Energy

IWR
7.2%
IWL
2.5%

Real Estate

IWR
7.0%
IWL
1.0%

Utilities

IWR
6.1%
IWL
1.7%

Basic Materials

IWR
4.3%
IWL
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWR
4.1%
IWL
4.7%

Communication Services

IWR
3.4%
IWL
12.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Russell Midcap ETF

iShares Russell Top 200 ETF

Often compared with IWR:
IWR vs. VOIWR vs. IWDIWR vs. SPMDIWR vs. IWNIWR vs. SCHMIWR vs. VXFIWR vs. REGL
Often compared with IWL:
IWL vs. IWYIWL vs. VOOIWL vs. SPYIWL vs. IVVIWL vs. QQQMIWL vs. QQQIWL vs. QUAL

Return for Risk

IWR vs. IWL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWR
IWR Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
IWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
IWL
IWL Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
IWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWL Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
IWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWL Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

IWR vs. IWL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL). 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.

IWRIWLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.63
2.35

-0.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.35
3.20

-0.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.42

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.66

2.91

-0.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.28

12.92

-2.64

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. IWL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWR Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is lower than the IWL Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWR and IWL, 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

IWRIWLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63

2.35

-0.72

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

0.85

-0.41

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

0.91

-0.31

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.88

-0.39

Drawdowns

IWR vs. IWL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, which is greater than IWL's maximum drawdown of -32.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and IWL.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWRIWLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.78%

-32.71%

-26.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.17%

-9.83%

+1.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.09%

-19.15%

-1.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.18%

-25.65%

-0.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.59%

-32.71%

-7.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

-0.83%

+0.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.80%

-3.88%

-3.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.11%

2.21%

-0.10%

Volatility

IWR vs. IWL - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) has a higher volatility of 3.26% compared to iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) at 2.98%. This indicates that IWR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWRIWLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.26%

2.98%

+0.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.84%

9.15%

+0.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.39%

12.19%

+1.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.23%

17.17%

+1.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.36%

18.08%

+1.28%

IWR vs. IWL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, more than IWL's 0.82% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF		0.82%0.90%1.04%1.30%1.54%1.12%1.30%1.96%1.93%1.69%1.96%2.14%
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		1.15%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 IWL have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWR has higher volatility (3.26%) compared to IWL (2.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs IWL's -32.71%.

On 10-year performance, IWL leads with 16.38% vs 11.55% for IWR. On fees, IWL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWL has performed better with a 16.38% return vs 11.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

IWR has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.82% for IWL.

IWR is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while IWL is Large Cap Growth Equities. IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while IWL tracks Russell Top 200 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWR and 0.15% for IWL.

IWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.63), 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 IWR and IWL

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