KEAT vs. IWD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

KEAT (Keating Active ETF) and IWD (iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KEAT is a Global Allocation fund actively managed by Keating, while IWD is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Value Index. KEAT is actively managed, while IWD is passively managed. Over the past year, KEAT returned 19.10% vs 28.22% for IWD. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KEAT charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IWD.

Performance

KEAT vs. IWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Keating Active ETF (KEAT) and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KEAT achieves a 5.02% return, which is significantly lower than IWD's 15.35% return.

KEAT

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: -5.12%
• YTD: 5.02%
• 6M: 4.22%
• 1Y: 19.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IWD

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: 2.28%
• YTD: 15.35%
• 6M: 14.66%
• 1Y: 28.22%
• 3Y*: 18.41%
• 5Y*: 10.87%
• 10Y*: 11.61%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KEAT vs. IWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KEAT Keating Active ETF	5.02%	22.76%	3.10%
IWD iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF	15.35%	15.68%	6.94%

Correlation

The correlation between KEAT and IWD is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2024	0.58

The correlation between KEAT and IWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

KEAT vs. IWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

KEAT

KEAT Risk / Return Rank: 51
KEAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
KEAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
KEAT Omega Ratio Rank: 55
KEAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
KEAT Martin Ratio Rank: 45

IWD

IWD Risk / Return Rank: 83
IWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
IWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
IWD Omega Ratio Rank: 80
IWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
IWD Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

KEAT vs. IWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Keating Active ETF (KEAT) and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD). 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.

	KEAT	IWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	2.52	-0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.42	3.52	-1.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.45	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.04	4.18	-2.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.99	17.32	-10.33

KEAT vs. IWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KEAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the IWD Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KEAT and IWD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

KEAT vs. IWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KEAT drawdown since its inception was -9.40%, smaller than the maximum IWD drawdown of -60.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KEAT and IWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	KEAT	IWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.40%	-60.10%	+50.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.40%	-6.79%	-2.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.71%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.04%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.51%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.40%	-1.16%	-8.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.70%	-8.64%	+6.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.74%	1.63%	+1.11%

Volatility

KEAT vs. IWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Keating Active ETF (KEAT) is 3.48%, while iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD) has a volatility of 4.14%. This indicates that KEAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KEAT	IWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.48%	4.14%	-0.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.81%	8.67%	+0.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.73%	11.27%	-0.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.41%	14.84%	-4.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.41%	17.28%	-6.87%

KEAT vs. IWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

KEAT has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IWD's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

KEAT vs. IWD - Dividend Comparison

KEAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, more than IWD's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IWD iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF	1.45%	1.69%	1.87%	2.02%	2.15%	1.62%	2.05%	2.45%	2.71%	2.09%	2.25%	2.47%
KEAT Keating Active ETF	2.34%	2.48%	1.72%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KEAT and IWD in my portfolio?

KEAT and IWD have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KEAT or IWD?

IWD has higher volatility (4.14%) compared to KEAT (3.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KEAT dropped -9.40% vs IWD's -60.10%.

Which ETF is better, KEAT or IWD?

On 1-year performance, IWD leads with 28.22% vs 19.10% for KEAT. On fees, IWD is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, KEAT has been the lower-risk option at 3.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KEAT or IWD?

Over the 1-year period, IWD has performed better with a 28.22% return vs 19.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KEAT or IWD?

IWD is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for KEAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KEAT or IWD?

KEAT has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 1.45% for IWD.

What is the main difference between KEAT and IWD?

KEAT is categorized as Global Allocation, while IWD is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Keating and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for KEAT and 0.18% for IWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.79), 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.