PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IXJ vs. IWM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

IXJ (iShares Global Healthcare ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IXJ is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the S&P Global 1200 Health Care (Sector) 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, IXJ returned 8.22%/yr vs 10.70%/yr for IWM. Their 0.61 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IXJ charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

IXJ vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) 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, IXJ achieves a 3.85% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 18.79% return. Over the past 10 years, IXJ has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 8.22%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.70% annualized return.

IXJ

1D
-0.97%
1M
-1.26%
6M
2.41%
YTD
3.85%
1Y
21.78%
3Y*
7.07%
5Y*
4.53%
10Y*
8.22%
ALL TIME*
7.37%

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

IXJ

iShares Global Healthcare ETF
$16.06M$16.61M$23.38M

IXJ vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IXJ
iShares Global Healthcare ETF		3.85%14.99%0.55%3.62%-4.94%19.60%12.74%23.23%2.83%20.44%
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 IXJ and IWM is 0.34, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

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

0.34

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

0.46

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

0.52

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2001

0.61

Over the past year, the correlation between IXJ and IWM has dropped to 0.34 - well below their long-term average of 0.61, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IXJ vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IXJ
IWM

Healthcare

99.2%
20.0%

Consumer Defensive

0.5%
2.8%

Technology

0.4%
13.6%

Basic Materials

-

4.5%

Communication Services

-

2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.2%

Energy

-

5.6%

Financial Services

-

18.3%

Industrials

-

13.7%

Real Estate

-

7.0%

Utilities

-

2.9%

Healthcare

IXJ
99.2%
IWM
20.0%

Consumer Defensive

IXJ
0.5%
IWM
2.8%

Technology

IXJ
0.4%
IWM
13.6%

Basic Materials

IXJ

-

IWM
4.5%

Communication Services

IXJ

-

IWM
2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

IXJ

-

IWM
9.2%

Energy

IXJ

-

IWM
5.6%

Financial Services

IXJ

-

IWM
18.3%

Industrials

IXJ

-

IWM
13.7%

Real Estate

IXJ

-

IWM
7.0%

Utilities

IXJ

-

IWM
2.9%

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 Healthcare ETF

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Often compared with IXJ:
IXJ vs. XLVIXJ vs. VHTIXJ vs. IHIIXJ vs. FHLCIXJ vs. XDWH.LIXJ vs. IVVIXJ vs. HLTH.L
Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. IWO

Return for Risk

IXJ vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
IXJ
IXJ Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
IXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
IXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
IXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
IXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
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.

IXJ vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

IXJIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.50
1.77

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.38
2.51

-0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.30

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.10

3.11

-1.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.99

11.02

-6.02

IXJ vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IXJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IXJ 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

IXJ vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IXJ drawdown since its inception was -40.60%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IXJ and IWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IXJIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.60%

-59.05%

+18.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.78%

-11.03%

+0.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.14%

-27.50%

+9.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.14%

-31.91%

+13.77%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.35%

-41.13%

+13.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.52%

-3.08%

+0.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.90%

-10.71%

+3.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.52%

3.11%

+1.41%

Volatility

IXJ vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) has a higher volatility of 5.66% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 3.82%. This indicates that IXJ'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

IXJIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.66%

3.82%

+1.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.61%

14.12%

-2.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.38%

19.41%

-4.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.50%

22.48%

-7.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.74%

23.01%

-7.27%

IXJ vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

IXJ vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

IXJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, 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%
IXJ
iShares Global Healthcare ETF		1.44%1.40%1.50%1.38%1.17%1.12%1.27%1.42%2.11%1.46%1.73%2.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

IXJ and IWM have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IXJ has higher volatility (5.66%) compared to IWM (3.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IXJ dropped -40.60% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.70% vs 8.22% for IXJ. 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 8.22%. 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 IXJ.

IXJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.44%, compared with 0.91% for IWM.

IXJ is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. IXJ tracks S&P Global 1200 Health Care (Sector) Capped Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IXJ and 0.19% for IWM.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.50), 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 IXJ 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