PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWS vs. IWN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWS vs. IWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF (IWS) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWS achieves a 15.06% return, which is significantly lower than IWN's 17.42% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWS having a 10.23% annualized return and IWN not far behind at 10.16%.


IWS

1D
-0.04%
1M
3.74%
YTD
15.06%
6M
15.13%
1Y
27.01%
3Y*
17.40%
5Y*
8.37%
10Y*
10.23%

IWN

1D
-1.31%
1M
2.73%
YTD
17.42%
6M
16.54%
1Y
41.15%
3Y*
17.66%
5Y*
6.48%
10Y*
10.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWS vs. IWN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWS
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF
15.06%10.82%12.91%12.52%-12.29%28.10%4.83%26.73%-12.43%13.14%
IWN
iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF
17.42%12.40%7.63%14.56%-14.77%27.96%4.66%22.01%-13.01%7.69%

Correlation

The correlation between IWS and IWN 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

0.93

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

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2001

0.91

The correlation between IWS and IWN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWS vs. IWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWS
IWN

Industrials

16.7%
11.1%

Technology

16.5%
12.4%

Financial Services

14.1%
24.2%

Real Estate

8.6%
10.2%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
8.7%

Energy

8.1%
9.2%

Healthcare

7.3%
8.8%

Utilities

7.0%
5.7%

Basic Materials

5.4%
5.4%

Consumer Defensive

4.8%
2.0%

Communication Services

3.1%
1.6%

Industrials

IWS
16.7%
IWN
11.1%

Technology

IWS
16.5%
IWN
12.4%

Financial Services

IWS
14.1%
IWN
24.2%

Real Estate

IWS
8.6%
IWN
10.2%

Consumer Cyclical

IWS
8.4%
IWN
8.7%

Energy

IWS
8.1%
IWN
9.2%

Healthcare

IWS
7.3%
IWN
8.8%

Utilities

IWS
7.0%
IWN
5.7%

Basic Materials

IWS
5.4%
IWN
5.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWS
4.8%
IWN
2.0%

Communication Services

IWS
3.1%
IWN
1.6%

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

IWS vs. IWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWS
IWS Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
IWS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWS Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
IWS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWS Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

IWN
IWN Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
IWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWN Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
IWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWN Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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.

IWS vs. IWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF (IWS) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN). 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.


IWSIWNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.40

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.60

4.89

-1.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.59

16.44

-2.85

IWS vs. IWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWS Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is comparable to the IWN Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWS and IWN, 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


IWSIWNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.06

2.33

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

0.30

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.44

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.39

+0.03

Drawdowns

IWS vs. IWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWS drawdown since its inception was -62.40%, roughly equal to the maximum IWN drawdown of -61.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWS and IWN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWSIWNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.40%

-61.55%

-0.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.53%

-8.45%

+0.92%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.57%

-26.70%

+6.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.23%

-26.70%

+5.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.83%

-46.08%

+2.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.04%

-1.47%

+1.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.02%

-10.16%

+2.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.99%

2.51%

-0.52%

Volatility

IWS vs. IWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF (IWS) is 3.40%, while iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) has a volatility of 4.91%. This indicates that IWS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWSIWNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.40%

4.91%

-1.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.57%

11.86%

-2.29%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.19%

17.81%

-4.62%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.30%

21.43%

-4.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.36%

23.39%

-4.03%

IWS vs. IWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWS has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than IWN's 0.24% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IWS vs. IWN - Dividend Comparison

IWS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.34%, less than IWN's 1.46% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWN
iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF
1.46%1.70%1.80%2.04%2.12%1.48%1.60%1.92%1.99%1.78%1.74%2.15%
IWS
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF
1.34%1.53%1.50%1.76%1.93%1.39%1.87%1.97%2.53%1.96%2.10%2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, IWS and IWN 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.

IWN has higher volatility (4.91%) compared to IWS (3.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWS dropped -62.40% vs IWN's -61.55%.

On 10-year performance, IWS leads with 10.23% vs 10.16% for IWN. On fees, IWS is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, IWS has been the lower-risk option at 3.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWS has performed better with a 10.23% return vs 10.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWS is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for IWN.

IWN has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 1.34% for IWS.

IWS is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while IWN is Small Cap Value Equities. IWS tracks Russell Midcap Value Index, while IWN tracks Russell 2000 Value Index. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IWS and 0.24% for IWN.

IWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 2.06), 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 IWS and IWN

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