PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

LDEM vs. IWM

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

LDEM (iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LDEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LDEM returned 2.20%/yr vs 7.64%/yr for IWM. Their 0.58 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LDEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

LDEM vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) 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, LDEM achieves a 4.06% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 20.84% return.

LDEM

1D
0.75%
1M
1.98%
6M
-2.84%
YTD
4.06%
1Y
14.36%
3Y*
12.64%
5Y*
2.20%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
5.02%

IWM

1D
1.72%
1M
-0.46%
6M
13.45%
YTD
20.84%
1Y
39.26%
3Y*
16.48%
5Y*
7.64%
10Y*
10.63%
ALL TIME*
8.80%
*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
$6.77B$6.36B$7.44B

LDEM

iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF
$34.08K$42.01K$92.23K

LDEM vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
LDEM
iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF		4.06%32.49%5.87%6.49%-22.46%-2.03%16.30%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		20.84%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%19.10%

Correlation

The correlation between LDEM and IWM is 0.64, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

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

0.64

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

0.57

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

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 12, 2020

0.58

The correlation between LDEM and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

LDEM vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
LDEM
IWM

Financial Services

24.8%
18.3%

Technology

23.9%
13.6%

Consumer Cyclical

12.0%
9.2%

Communication Services

9.9%
2.0%

Industrials

7.6%
13.7%

Basic Materials

6.7%
4.5%

Energy

4.4%
5.6%

Healthcare

3.6%
20.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.4%
2.8%

Utilities

2.5%
2.9%

Real Estate

1.4%
7.0%

Financial Services

LDEM
24.8%
IWM
18.3%

Technology

LDEM
23.9%
IWM
13.6%

Consumer Cyclical

LDEM
12.0%
IWM
9.2%

Communication Services

LDEM
9.9%
IWM
2.0%

Industrials

LDEM
7.6%
IWM
13.7%

Basic Materials

LDEM
6.7%
IWM
4.5%

Energy

LDEM
4.4%
IWM
5.6%

Healthcare

LDEM
3.6%
IWM
20.0%

Consumer Defensive

LDEM
3.4%
IWM
2.8%

Utilities

LDEM
2.5%
IWM
2.9%

Real Estate

LDEM
1.4%
IWM
7.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Often compared with LDEM:
LDEM vs. EMXFLDEM vs. DIVISLAB.NSLDEM vs. ESGELDEM vs. EEMLDEM vs. FNDELDEM vs. IEMGLDEM vs. AVEM
Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. IWO

Return for Risk

LDEM vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
LDEM
LDEM Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
LDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
LDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
LDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
LDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

LDEM vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) 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.

LDEMIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.74
2.04

-1.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.13
2.85

-1.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.34

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.09

3.58

-2.48

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.95

12.68

-9.73

LDEM vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LDEM Sharpe Ratio is 0.74, which is lower than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LDEM 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

LDEM vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LDEM drawdown since its inception was -40.82%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDEM and IWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

LDEMIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.82%

-59.05%

+18.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.21%

-11.03%

-2.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.12%

-27.50%

+12.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.26%

-31.91%

-6.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-41.13%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.49%

-1.41%

-5.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.09%

-10.71%

-6.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.89%

3.11%

+1.78%

Volatility

LDEM vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) has a higher volatility of 6.84% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 4.21%. This indicates that LDEM'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

LDEMIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.84%

4.21%

+2.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.91%

14.13%

+2.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.55%

19.36%

+0.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.50%

22.50%

-3.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.92%

23.02%

-2.10%

LDEM vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

LDEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than IWM's 0.19% 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

LDEM vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

LDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, more than IWM's 0.90% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		0.90%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
LDEM
iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF		2.95%3.26%2.64%3.20%4.93%1.82%1.89%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

LDEM and IWM have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LDEM has higher volatility (6.84%) compared to IWM (4.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LDEM dropped -40.82% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 5-year performance, IWM leads with 7.64% vs 2.20% for LDEM. On fees, LDEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, IWM has been the lower-risk option at 4.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWM has performed better with a 7.64% return vs 2.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LDEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.

LDEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.95%, compared with 0.90% for IWM.

LDEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. LDEM tracks MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for LDEM and 0.19% for IWM.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 0.74), 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 LDEM 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