MTUM vs. ITB
MTUM (iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF) and ITB (iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MTUM is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index, while ITB is a Building & Construction fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MTUM returned 17.54%/yr vs 14.32%/yr for ITB. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MTUM charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for ITB.
Performance
MTUM vs. ITB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MTUM achieves a 33.55% return, which is significantly higher than ITB's 1.18% return. Over the past 10 years, MTUM has outperformed ITB with an annualized return of 17.54%, while ITB has yielded a comparatively lower 14.32% annualized return.
MTUM
- 1D
- 2.96%
- 1M
- 11.98%
- YTD
- 33.55%
- 6M
- 34.98%
- 1Y
- 46.22%
- 3Y*
- 33.86%
- 5Y*
- 15.90%
- 10Y*
- 17.54%
ITB
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 12.49%
- YTD
- 1.18%
- 6M
- -4.59%
- 1Y
- 8.99%
- 3Y*
- 7.33%
- 5Y*
- 8.75%
- 10Y*
- 14.32%
MTUM vs. ITB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MTUM iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF | 33.55% | 22.15% | 32.89% | 9.15% | -18.27% | 13.36% | 29.86% | 27.25% | -1.67% | 37.50% |
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF | 1.18% | -5.26% | 2.06% | 68.91% | -26.26% | 49.25% | 26.42% | 48.70% | -30.92% | 59.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between MTUM and ITB is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2013 | 0.52 |
Over the past year, the correlation between MTUM and ITB has dropped to 0.27 - well below their long-term average of 0.52, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
MTUM vs. ITB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MTUM
ITB
Technology
-
Industrials
Energy
-
Communication Services
-
Financial Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Utilities
-
Technology
MTUM
ITB
-
Industrials
MTUM
ITB
Energy
MTUM
ITB
-
Communication Services
MTUM
ITB
-
Financial Services
MTUM
ITB
-
Consumer Defensive
MTUM
ITB
-
Healthcare
MTUM
ITB
-
Consumer Cyclical
MTUM
ITB
Basic Materials
MTUM
ITB
Real Estate
MTUM
ITB
Utilities
MTUM
ITB
-
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
MTUM vs. ITB — Risk / Return Rank
MTUM
ITB
MTUM vs. ITB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) and iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB). 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.
| MTUM | ITB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.90 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.08 | +0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.02 | 0.35 | +3.68 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.48 | 0.67 | +14.81 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MTUM vs. ITB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MTUM drawdown since its inception was -34.08%, smaller than the maximum ITB drawdown of -86.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MTUM and ITB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MTUM | ITB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.08% | -86.53% | +52.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.54% | -26.04% | +14.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.99% | -33.35% | +12.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.28% | -40.55% | +8.27% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.08% | -52.10% | +18.02% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -23.30% | +23.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.20% | -37.08% | +30.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.99% | 13.49% | -10.50% |
Volatility
MTUM vs. ITB - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) has a higher volatility of 11.20% compared to iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) at 9.26%. This indicates that MTUM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ITB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MTUM | ITB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.20% | 9.26% | +1.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.83% | 20.89% | -2.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.08% | 29.80% | -8.72% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.99% | 29.29% | -8.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.23% | 30.06% | -8.83% |
MTUM vs. ITB - Expense Ratio Comparison
MTUM has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ITB's 0.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
MTUM vs. ITB - Dividend Comparison
MTUM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.70%, less than ITB's 1.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF | 1.33% | 1.67% | 0.46% | 0.48% | 0.86% | 0.37% | 0.46% | 0.50% | 0.63% | 0.28% | 0.43% | 0.34% |
MTUM iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF | 0.70% | 0.91% | 0.75% | 1.35% | 1.80% | 0.55% | 0.83% | 1.48% | 1.27% | 1.02% | 1.43% | 1.12% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MTUM and ITB have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MTUM has higher volatility (11.20%) compared to ITB (9.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MTUM dropped -34.08% vs ITB's -86.53%.
On 10-year performance, MTUM leads with 17.54% vs 14.32% for ITB. On fees, MTUM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, ITB has been the lower-risk option at 9.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 17.54% return vs 14.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MTUM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for ITB.
ITB has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.70% for MTUM.
MTUM is categorized as Momentum, while ITB is Building & Construction. MTUM tracks MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index, while ITB tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for MTUM and 0.38% for ITB.
MTUM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 0.30), 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.
Find the right allocation for MTUM and ITB
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