OMFS vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

OMFS (Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OMFS is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, OMFS returned 5.80%/yr vs 6.49%/yr for IWM. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OMFS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

OMFS vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OMFS achieves a 14.58% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 18.69% return.

OMFS

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: 1.85%
• YTD: 14.58%
• 6M: 15.91%
• 1Y: 30.07%
• 3Y*: 14.46%
• 5Y*: 5.80%
• 10Y*: —

IWM

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 4.43%
• YTD: 18.69%
• 6M: 19.57%
• 1Y: 43.31%
• 3Y*: 18.42%
• 5Y*: 6.49%
• 10Y*: 11.08%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

OMFS vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF	14.58%	13.34%	3.98%	15.12%	-17.29%	28.60%	15.02%	27.12%	-9.01%	3.71%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	18.69%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-20.48%	14.54%	20.03%	25.39%	-11.12%	4.41%

Correlation

The correlation between OMFS and IWM is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2017	0.87

The correlation between OMFS and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

OMFS vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OMFS	IWM
Financial Services	24.3%	15.8%
Industrials	14.7%	17.1%
Technology	14.2%	19.5%
Healthcare	13.2%	15.8%
Real Estate	12.2%	5.7%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	7.8%
Energy	4.1%	6.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	2.1%
Basic Materials	2.8%	4.5%
Utilities	1.1%	3.0%
Communication Services	1.1%	2.0%

Return for Risk

OMFS vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

OMFS

OMFS Risk / Return Rank: 54
OMFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
OMFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
OMFS Omega Ratio Rank: 46
OMFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
OMFS Martin Ratio Rank: 61

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 69
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 60
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

OMFS vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) 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.

	OMFS	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	2.27	-0.56
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	3.12	-0.60
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.37	-0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.20	3.97	-0.77
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.01	14.12	-3.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OMFS vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OMFS Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OMFS 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	OMFS	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.71	2.27	-0.56
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27	0.29	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	0.37	+0.05

Drawdowns

OMFS vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMFS drawdown since its inception was -42.50%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFS and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	OMFS	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.50%	-59.05%	+16.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.38%	-11.03%	+1.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.35%	-27.50%	+5.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.22%	-31.91%	+2.69%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.16%	-0.13%	-1.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.49%	-10.77%	+0.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.72%	3.10%	-0.38%

Volatility

OMFS vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) is 5.00%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.56%. This indicates that OMFS 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.

Volatility by Period

	OMFS	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.00%	5.56%	-0.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.43%	13.52%	-1.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.62%	19.14%	-1.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.46%	22.52%	-1.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.31%	23.04%	+1.27%

OMFS vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

OMFS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

OMFS vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

OMFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, 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%
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF	0.91%	0.80%	1.87%	1.27%	1.84%	0.66%	1.07%	1.29%	1.50%	0.34%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OMFS and IWM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, OMFS and IWM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, OMFS or IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (5.56%) compared to OMFS (5.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFS dropped -42.50% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, OMFS or IWM?

On 5-year performance, IWM leads with 6.49% vs 5.80% for OMFS. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, OMFS has been the lower-risk option at 5.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OMFS or IWM?

Over the 5-year period, IWM has performed better with a 6.49% return vs 5.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OMFS or IWM?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for OMFS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OMFS or IWM?

OMFS has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.87% for IWM.

What is the main difference between OMFS and IWM?

OMFS is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. OMFS tracks Russell 2000 Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for OMFS and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 1.71), 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.