PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

MLPD.L vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

MLPD.L (Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPD.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MLPD.L returned 7.11%/yr vs 10.78%/yr for IWM. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPD.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist) (MLPD.L) 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, MLPD.L achieves a 18.82% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 15.62% return. Over the past 10 years, MLPD.L has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 7.11%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.78% annualized return.

MLPD.L

1D
-0.49%
1M
1.36%
YTD
18.82%
6M
14.62%
1Y
15.61%
3Y*
18.84%
5Y*
16.46%
10Y*
7.11%

IWM

1D
0.87%
1M
-0.02%
YTD
15.62%
6M
13.83%
1Y
35.52%
3Y*
16.64%
5Y*
5.48%
10Y*
10.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MLPD.L
Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)		18.82%2.34%22.53%19.70%31.82%36.90%-31.38%7.22%-14.92%-8.67%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		15.62%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPD.L and IWM is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.02

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.22

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.31

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 17, 2013

0.31

Over the past year, the correlation between MLPD.L and IWM has dropped to 0.02 - well below their long-term average of 0.31, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MLPD.L
IWM

Energy

96.7%
5.8%

Utilities

3.2%
3.0%

Industrials

0.2%
17.2%

Basic Materials

-

4.5%

Communication Services

-

2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

7.9%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.1%

Financial Services

-

15.6%

Healthcare

-

16.1%

Real Estate

-

5.6%

Technology

-

19.5%

Energy

MLPD.L
96.7%
IWM
5.8%

Utilities

MLPD.L
3.2%
IWM
3.0%

Industrials

MLPD.L
0.2%
IWM
17.2%

Basic Materials

MLPD.L

-

IWM
4.5%

Communication Services

MLPD.L

-

IWM
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

MLPD.L

-

IWM
7.9%

Consumer Defensive

MLPD.L

-

IWM
2.1%

Financial Services

MLPD.L

-

IWM
15.6%

Healthcare

MLPD.L

-

IWM
16.1%

Real Estate

MLPD.L

-

IWM
5.6%

Technology

MLPD.L

-

IWM
19.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Often compared with MLPD.L:
MLPD.L vs. MLPXMLPD.L vs. MLPAMLPD.L vs. TDIV.ASMLPD.L vs. EIPIXMLPD.L vs. JEPQMLPD.L vs. QYLDMLPD.L vs. MAIN
Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. IWO

Return for Risk

MLPD.L vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MLPD.L
MLPD.L Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
MLPD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist) (MLPD.L) 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.

MLPD.LIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.09
1.83

-0.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.55
2.54

-0.99

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.30

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.83

3.24

-1.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.68

11.44

-6.75

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPD.L 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

MLPD.LIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.09

1.83

-0.74

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

0.24

+0.57

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

0.47

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.13

0.36

-0.24

Drawdowns

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPD.L drawdown since its inception was -82.22%, which is greater than IWM's maximum drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPD.L and IWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MLPD.LIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.22%

-59.05%

-23.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.48%

-11.03%

+2.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.24%

-27.50%

+10.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.78%

-31.91%

+10.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.74%

-41.13%

-34.61%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.16%

-2.71%

-0.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.08%

-10.76%

-17.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.33%

3.11%

+0.22%

Volatility

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist) (MLPD.L) is 4.46%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 6.52%. This indicates that MLPD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MLPD.LIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.46%

6.52%

-2.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.93%

14.00%

-3.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.24%

19.53%

-5.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.36%

22.58%

-2.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.33%

23.07%

+5.26%

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPD.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPD.L vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

MLPD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.56%, more than IWM's 0.89% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		0.89%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
MLPD.L
Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)		7.56%8.21%8.18%8.60%7.98%8.57%11.03%10.06%9.87%8.15%8.14%9.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

MLPD.L and IWM have a correlation of 0.02, 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 0.50% for MLPD.L.

MLPD.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. MLPD.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MLPD.L and 0.19% for IWM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MLPD.L 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