METL vs. IWM
METL (Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - METL is a Natural Resources fund actively managed by Sprott, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. METL is actively managed, while IWM is passively managed. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. METL charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
METL vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, METL achieves a -6.10% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 19.24% return.
METL
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- -15.36%
- 6M
- -19.31%
- YTD
- -6.10%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
IWM
- 1D
- -0.59%
- 1M
- -1.11%
- 6M
- 10.45%
- YTD
- 19.24%
- 1Y
- 32.84%
- 3Y*
- 15.91%
- 5Y*
- 6.97%
- 10Y*
- 10.65%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.76%
METL vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
METL Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF | -6.10% | 28.19% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 19.24% | 4.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between METL and IWM is 0.61, 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 Sep 10, 2025 | 0.61 |
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
METL vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
METL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IWM
METL vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF (METL) 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.
| METL | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.29 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.99 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 10.54 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
METL vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum METL drawdown since its inception was -28.80%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for METL and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| METL | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.80% | -59.05% | +30.25% |
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 | -28.80% | -2.71% | -26.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.00% | -10.72% | +0.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.12% | — |
Volatility
METL vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| METL | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.62% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 14.17% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 44.16% | 19.38% | +24.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 44.16% | 22.49% | +21.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.16% | 23.00% | +21.16% |
METL vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
METL has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
METL vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
METL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, more than IWM's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
METL Sprott Active Metals & Miners ETF | 1.06% | 0.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
METL and IWM have a correlation of 0.61, 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 0.89% for METL.
METL has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 0.91% for IWM.
METL is categorized as Natural Resources, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for METL and 0.19% for IWM.
Find the right allocation for METL 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