PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IWR vs. SCHM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and SCHM (Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWR is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Index, while SCHM is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones US Total Stock Market Mid-Cap. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWR returned 11.90%/yr vs 11.71%/yr for SCHM. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IWR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHM.

Performance

IWR vs. SCHM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM). 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 12.62% return, which is significantly lower than SCHM's 19.11% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWR having a 11.90% annualized return and SCHM not far behind at 11.71%.

IWR

1D
-1.15%
1M
2.08%
YTD
12.62%
6M
11.09%
1Y
20.95%
3Y*
16.93%
5Y*
7.89%
10Y*
11.90%

SCHM

1D
-1.73%
1M
2.88%
YTD
19.11%
6M
16.97%
1Y
31.33%
3Y*
17.85%
5Y*
8.08%
10Y*
11.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWR vs. SCHM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		12.62%10.37%15.21%17.05%-17.48%22.44%16.93%30.23%-9.10%18.25%
SCHM
Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF		19.11%10.17%11.98%16.69%-17.07%19.36%15.26%27.48%-8.77%19.60%

Correlation

The correlation between IWR and SCHM is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.97

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

0.98

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

0.98

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 13, 2011

0.99

The correlation between IWR and SCHM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWR vs. SCHM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWR
SCHM

Technology

19.6%
22.1%

Industrials

18.1%
21.7%

Financial Services

12.1%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
10.8%

Healthcare

8.7%
10.9%

Real Estate

6.8%
6.4%

Energy

6.5%
3.4%

Utilities

5.7%
2.9%

Basic Materials

4.2%
4.7%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
3.4%

Communication Services

3.3%
2.6%

Technology

IWR
19.6%
SCHM
22.1%

Industrials

IWR
18.1%
SCHM
21.7%

Financial Services

IWR
12.1%
SCHM
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

IWR
11.1%
SCHM
10.8%

Healthcare

IWR
8.7%
SCHM
10.9%

Real Estate

IWR
6.8%
SCHM
6.4%

Energy

IWR
6.5%
SCHM
3.4%

Utilities

IWR
5.7%
SCHM
2.9%

Basic Materials

IWR
4.2%
SCHM
4.7%

Consumer Defensive

IWR
3.9%
SCHM
3.4%

Communication Services

IWR
3.3%
SCHM
2.6%

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

Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF

Often compared with IWR:
IWR vs. VOIWR vs. IWDIWR vs. SPMDIWR vs. IWNIWR vs. VXFIWR vs. REGLIWR vs. IMCG
Often compared with SCHM:
SCHM vs. VOSCHM vs. SCHASCHM vs. VOOSCHM vs. IJHSCHM vs. SWMCXSCHM vs. VOTSCHM vs. SPMD

Return for Risk

IWR vs. SCHM — 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: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
SCHM
SCHM Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
SCHM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHM Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHM Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
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. SCHM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM). 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.

IWRSCHMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.52
1.93

-0.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.20
2.72

-0.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.34

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

3.38

-0.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.85

13.48

-3.63

IWR vs. SCHM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWR Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the SCHM Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWR and SCHM, 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...

Drawdowns

IWR vs. SCHM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, which is greater than SCHM's maximum drawdown of -42.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and SCHM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWRSCHMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.78%

-42.43%

-16.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.17%

-9.32%

+1.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.09%

-23.27%

+2.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.18%

-26.46%

+0.28%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.59%

-42.43%

+1.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.45%

-1.73%

+0.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.79%

-5.64%

-2.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.13%

2.33%

-0.20%

Volatility

IWR vs. SCHM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) is 4.61%, while Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that IWR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWRSCHMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.61%

5.75%

-1.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.46%

12.61%

-2.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.83%

16.30%

-2.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.29%

19.67%

-1.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.36%

20.49%

-1.13%

IWR vs. SCHM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, less than SCHM's 1.22% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		1.18%1.29%1.27%1.43%1.59%1.04%1.28%1.43%1.98%1.52%1.72%1.59%
SCHM
Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF		1.22%1.46%1.43%1.50%1.67%1.13%1.31%1.48%1.56%1.27%1.51%1.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.97, IWR and SCHM 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.

SCHM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to IWR (4.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs SCHM's -42.43%.

On 10-year performance, IWR leads with 11.90% vs 11.71% for SCHM. On fees, SCHM is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 4.61%. 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 11.90% return vs 11.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHM is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWR.

SCHM has the higher dividend yield at 1.22%, compared with 1.18% for IWR.

IWR is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while SCHM is Mid Cap Blend Equities. IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while SCHM tracks Dow Jones US Total Stock Market Mid-Cap. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWR and 0.04% for SCHM.

SCHM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.52), 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 SCHM

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