MBBA vs. IWM
MBBA (iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MBBA is a Mortgage Backed Securities fund actively managed by iShares, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. MBBA is actively managed, while IWM is passively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MBBA charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
MBBA vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MBBA
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 0.34%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWM
- 1D
- 1.51%
- 1M
- 3.34%
- YTD
- 18.84%
- 6M
- 16.56%
- 1Y
- 41.60%
- 3Y*
- 19.00%
- 5Y*
- 6.43%
- 10Y*
- 10.97%
MBBA vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
MBBA iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF | 0.54% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 10.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between MBBA and IWM is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2026 | 0.52 |
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
MBBA vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
MBBA
IWM
MBBA vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF (MBBA) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MBBA | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.18 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.29 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 0.37 | -0.04 |
Drawdowns
MBBA vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MBBA drawdown since its inception was -2.83%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBBA and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MBBA | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.83% | -59.05% | +56.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -11.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -27.50% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -31.91% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.27% | -0.01% | -1.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.12% | -10.77% | +9.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.10% | — |
Volatility
MBBA vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MBBA | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.70% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.60% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.64% | 19.19% | -14.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.64% | 22.53% | -17.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.64% | 23.04% | -18.40% |
MBBA vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
MBBA has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
MBBA vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
MBBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than IWM's 0.87% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.87% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
MBBA iShares Mortgage-Backed Securities Active ETF | 1.84% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MBBA and IWM have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for MBBA.
MBBA has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 0.87% for IWM.
MBBA is categorized as Mortgage Backed Securities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for MBBA and 0.19% for IWM.
Find the right allocation for MBBA 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