NYF vs. IWM
NYF (iShares New York Muni Bond ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NYF is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, NYF returned 1.81%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. NYF charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
NYF vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NYF achieves a 1.51% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return. Over the past 10 years, NYF has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 1.81%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.93% annualized return.
NYF
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.58%
- YTD
- 1.51%
- 6M
- 1.91%
- 1Y
- 6.81%
- 3Y*
- 3.36%
- 5Y*
- 0.83%
- 10Y*
- 1.81%
IWM
- 1D
- -1.37%
- 1M
- 3.52%
- YTD
- 17.07%
- 6M
- 15.83%
- 1Y
- 39.10%
- 3Y*
- 17.88%
- 5Y*
- 6.11%
- 10Y*
- 10.93%
NYF vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NYF iShares New York Muni Bond ETF | 1.51% | 3.64% | 1.13% | 5.76% | -7.75% | 1.34% | 4.18% | 6.49% | 0.66% | 5.02% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 17.07% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -11.12% | 14.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between NYF and IWM is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2007 | -0.01 |
The correlation between NYF and IWM shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (all time) to 0.25 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
NYF vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
NYF
IWM
NYF vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares New York Muni Bond ETF (NYF) 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.
| NYF | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.41 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.34 | +0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.48 | 3.56 | -1.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.88 | 12.64 | -3.76 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NYF | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.46 | 2.05 | +0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 | 0.27 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.40 | 0.48 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 0.37 | +0.10 |
Drawdowns
NYF vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NYF drawdown since its inception was -13.12%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NYF and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NYF | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.12% | -59.05% | +45.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.76% | -11.03% | +8.27% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.68% | -27.50% | +21.82% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -12.71% | -31.91% | +19.20% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -13.12% | -41.13% | +28.01% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.56% | -1.49% | +0.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.31% | -10.77% | +8.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.77% | 3.10% | -2.33% |
Volatility
NYF vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares New York Muni Bond ETF (NYF) is 0.95%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that NYF 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
| NYF | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.95% | 5.75% | -4.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.08% | 13.53% | -11.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.78% | 19.20% | -16.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.00% | 22.52% | -18.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.48% | 23.04% | -18.56% |
NYF vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
NYF 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
NYF vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
NYF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.09%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.88% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
NYF iShares New York Muni Bond ETF | 3.09% | 2.99% | 2.77% | 2.36% | 2.04% | 1.85% | 1.98% | 2.19% | 2.48% | 2.46% | 2.43% | 2.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NYF and IWM have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to NYF (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NYF dropped -13.12% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.93% vs 1.81% for NYF. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, NYF has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.93% return vs 1.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for NYF.
NYF has the higher dividend yield at 3.09%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.
NYF is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. NYF tracks S&P New York AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for NYF and 0.19% for IWM.
NYF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 2.05), 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 NYF 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