PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IXC vs. IWM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

IXC (iShares Global Energy ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IXC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global 1200 Energy Capped Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IXC returned 10.52%/yr vs 10.70%/yr for IWM. Their 0.56 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IXC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

IXC vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC) 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, IXC achieves a 34.71% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 18.79% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IXC having a 10.52% annualized return and IWM not far ahead at 10.70%.

IXC

1D
0.63%
1M
13.16%
6M
19.17%
YTD
34.71%
1Y
45.16%
3Y*
16.60%
5Y*
22.34%
10Y*
10.52%
ALL TIME*
8.52%

IWM

1D
-0.48%
1M
-2.14%
6M
12.62%
YTD
18.79%
1Y
36.90%
3Y*
15.11%
5Y*
6.99%
10Y*
10.70%
ALL TIME*
8.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

IWM

iShares Russell 2000 ETF
$6.67B$6.32B$7.45B

IXC

iShares Global Energy ETF
$40.96M$62.51M$57.88M

IXC vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IXC
iShares Global Energy ETF		34.71%13.98%1.95%3.92%48.51%40.88%-31.00%12.67%-14.85%5.54%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		18.79%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between IXC and IWM is -0.02, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.02

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.27

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.38

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2001

0.56

The correlation between IXC and IWM shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (1 year) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IXC vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IXC
IWM

Energy

99.5%
5.6%

Utilities

0.2%
2.9%

Basic Materials

-

4.5%

Communication Services

-

2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.8%

Financial Services

-

18.3%

Healthcare

-

20.0%

Industrials

-

13.7%

Real Estate

-

7.0%

Technology

-

13.6%

Energy

IXC
99.5%
IWM
5.6%

Utilities

IXC
0.2%
IWM
2.9%

Basic Materials

IXC

-

IWM
4.5%

Communication Services

IXC

-

IWM
2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

IXC

-

IWM
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

IXC

-

IWM
2.8%

Financial Services

IXC

-

IWM
18.3%

Healthcare

IXC

-

IWM
20.0%

Industrials

IXC

-

IWM
13.7%

Real Estate

IXC

-

IWM
7.0%

Technology

IXC

-

IWM
13.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Global Energy ETF

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Often compared with IXC:
IXC vs. XLEIXC vs. VDEIXC vs. IYEIXC vs. OIHIXC vs. IUES.LIXC vs. DDMIXC vs. VOO
Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. IWO

Return for Risk

IXC vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
IXC
IXC Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
IXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
IXC Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
IXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
IXC Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IXC vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC) 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.

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.

IXCIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.22
1.77

+0.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.83
2.51

+0.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.30

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.83

3.11

-0.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.78

11.02

-2.24

IXC vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IXC Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IXC 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...

Drawdowns

IXC vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IXC drawdown since its inception was -67.88%, which is greater than IWM's maximum drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IXC and IWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IXCIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.88%

-59.05%

-8.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.36%

-11.03%

-4.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.06%

-27.50%

+8.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.93%

-31.91%

+6.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-64.16%

-41.13%

-23.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.05%

-3.08%

+0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.42%

-10.71%

-6.71%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.95%

3.11%

+1.84%

Volatility

IXC vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC) has a higher volatility of 6.07% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 3.82%. This indicates that IXC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IXCIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.07%

3.82%

+2.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.03%

14.12%

+1.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.61%

19.41%

+0.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.37%

22.48%

+0.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.82%

23.01%

+3.81%

IXC vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IXC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

IXC vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%, more than IWM's 0.91% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		0.91%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
IXC
iShares Global Energy ETF		2.82%3.68%4.56%3.45%4.76%3.98%4.86%7.00%3.51%3.05%2.86%3.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

IXC and IWM have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IXC has higher volatility (6.07%) compared to IWM (3.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IXC dropped -67.88% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.70% vs 10.52% for IXC. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 3.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.70% return vs 10.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IXC.

IXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.82%, compared with 0.91% for IWM.

IXC is categorized as Energy Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IXC tracks S&P Global 1200 Energy Capped Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IXC and 0.19% for IWM.

IXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 1.77), 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 IXC 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