PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IWR vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWR is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWR returned 11.55%/yr vs 10.97%/yr for IWM. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.19% expense ratio.

Performance

IWR vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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 13.02% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 18.84% return. Over the past 10 years, IWR has outperformed IWM with an annualized return of 11.55%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively lower 10.97% annualized return.

IWR

1D
0.52%
1M
3.28%
YTD
13.02%
6M
12.45%
1Y
22.54%
3Y*
17.59%
5Y*
8.11%
10Y*
11.55%

IWM

1D
1.51%
1M
3.34%
YTD
18.84%
6M
16.56%
1Y
41.60%
3Y*
19.00%
5Y*
6.43%
10Y*
10.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWR vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		13.02%10.37%15.21%17.05%-17.48%22.44%16.93%30.23%-9.10%18.25%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		18.84%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between IWR and IWM is 0.91, 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

0.91

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

0.92

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

0.94

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

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2001

0.91

The correlation between IWR and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWR vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWR
IWM

Industrials

18.4%
17.1%

Technology

17.2%
19.5%

Financial Services

12.5%
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

11.2%
7.8%

Healthcare

8.7%
15.8%

Energy

7.2%
6.0%

Real Estate

7.0%
5.7%

Utilities

6.1%
3.0%

Basic Materials

4.3%
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
2.1%

Communication Services

3.4%
2.0%

Industrials

IWR
18.4%
IWM
17.1%

Technology

IWR
17.2%
IWM
19.5%

Financial Services

IWR
12.5%
IWM
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IWR
11.2%
IWM
7.8%

Healthcare

IWR
8.7%
IWM
15.8%

Energy

IWR
7.2%
IWM
6.0%

Real Estate

IWR
7.0%
IWM
5.7%

Utilities

IWR
6.1%
IWM
3.0%

Basic Materials

IWR
4.3%
IWM
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

IWR
4.1%
IWM
2.1%

Communication Services

IWR
3.4%
IWM
2.0%

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 2000 ETF

Often compared with IWR:
IWR vs. VOIWR vs. IWDIWR vs. SPMDIWR vs. IWNIWR vs. SCHMIWR vs. VXFIWR vs. REGL
Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. IWO

Return for Risk

IWR vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWR
IWR Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
IWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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.

IWRIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.69
2.18

-0.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.44
3.00

-0.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.36

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.77

3.79

-1.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.70

13.45

-2.76

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. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWR Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWR and IWM, 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

IWRIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.69

2.18

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

0.29

+0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

0.48

+0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.37

+0.13

Drawdowns

IWR vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, roughly equal to the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and IWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWRIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.78%

-59.05%

+0.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.17%

-11.03%

+2.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.09%

-27.50%

+6.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.18%

-31.91%

+5.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.59%

-41.13%

+0.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.01%

+0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.80%

-10.77%

+2.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.11%

3.10%

-0.99%

Volatility

IWR vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) is 3.16%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.70%. This indicates that IWR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWRIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.16%

5.70%

-2.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.84%

13.60%

-3.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.36%

19.19%

-5.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.22%

22.53%

-4.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.36%

23.04%

-3.68%

IWR vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IWR and IWM have an expense ratio of 0.19%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IWR vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, more than IWM's 0.87% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		0.87%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		1.14%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 0.91, IWR and IWM 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.

IWM has higher volatility (5.70%) compared to IWR (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 10-year performance, IWR leads with 11.55% vs 10.97% for IWM. Both ETFs have the same 0.19% expense ratio. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.16%. 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 10.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWR and IWM have the same expense ratio: 0.19% per year.

IWR has the higher dividend yield at 1.14%, compared with 0.87% for IWM.

IWR is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.69), 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 IWM

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