PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ROUS vs. IWF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ROUS vs. IWF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF (ROUS) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ROUS achieves a 16.55% return, which is significantly higher than IWF's 7.11% return. Over the past 10 years, ROUS has underperformed IWF with an annualized return of 13.01%, while IWF has yielded a comparatively higher 18.49% annualized return.


ROUS

1D
0.01%
1M
6.18%
YTD
16.55%
6M
16.75%
1Y
29.42%
3Y*
20.87%
5Y*
12.84%
10Y*
13.01%

IWF

1D
-1.29%
1M
5.68%
YTD
7.11%
6M
6.51%
1Y
25.60%
3Y*
24.80%
5Y*
15.24%
10Y*
18.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ROUS vs. IWF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ROUS
Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF
16.55%15.21%17.61%15.05%-9.65%27.33%6.61%23.94%-9.59%22.88%
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
7.11%18.33%33.12%42.59%-29.31%27.43%38.25%35.86%-1.67%29.95%

Correlation

The correlation between ROUS and IWF is 0.66, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.66

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

0.70

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

0.77

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

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2015

0.71

The correlation between ROUS and IWF shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.77 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ROUS vs. IWF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ROUS
IWF

Technology

33.2%
53.2%

Healthcare

10.7%
7.0%

Financial Services

10.6%
4.9%

Industrials

10.4%
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
12.7%

Communication Services

8.6%
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

5.8%
2.5%

Utilities

3.8%
1.1%

Energy

3.0%
0.4%

Basic Materials

2.2%
0.3%

Real Estate

2.1%
0.4%

Technology

ROUS
33.2%
IWF
53.2%

Healthcare

ROUS
10.7%
IWF
7.0%

Financial Services

ROUS
10.6%
IWF
4.9%

Industrials

ROUS
10.4%
IWF
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ROUS
9.6%
IWF
12.7%

Communication Services

ROUS
8.6%
IWF
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

ROUS
5.8%
IWF
2.5%

Utilities

ROUS
3.8%
IWF
1.1%

Energy

ROUS
3.0%
IWF
0.4%

Basic Materials

ROUS
2.2%
IWF
0.3%

Real Estate

ROUS
2.1%
IWF
0.4%

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

ROUS vs. IWF — Risk / Return Rank

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

ROUS
ROUS Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
ROUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ROUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
ROUS Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
ROUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
ROUS Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

IWF
IWF Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
IWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWF Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWF Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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.

ROUS vs. IWF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF (ROUS) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF). 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.


ROUSIWFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.94

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.29

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.95

1.58

+3.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.38

5.28

+15.09

ROUS vs. IWF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ROUS Sharpe Ratio is 2.60, which is higher than the IWF Sharpe Ratio of 1.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ROUS and IWF, 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


ROUSIWFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.60

1.67

+0.94

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

0.72

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

0.88

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

0.40

+0.28

Drawdowns

ROUS vs. IWF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ROUS drawdown since its inception was -35.51%, smaller than the maximum IWF drawdown of -64.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROUS and IWF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ROUSIWFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.51%

-64.25%

+28.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.97%

-16.27%

+10.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.81%

-23.36%

+7.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.91%

-32.72%

+13.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.51%

-32.72%

-2.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.66%

+1.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.24%

-22.08%

+17.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.45%

4.86%

-3.41%

Volatility

ROUS vs. IWF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF (ROUS) is 2.54%, while iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) has a volatility of 3.61%. This indicates that ROUS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ROUSIWFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.54%

3.61%

-1.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.50%

11.66%

-3.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.37%

15.44%

-4.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.38%

21.40%

-7.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.96%

20.97%

-4.01%

ROUS vs. IWF - Expense Ratio Comparison

ROUS has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than IWF's 0.18% 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

ROUS vs. IWF - Dividend Comparison

ROUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%, more than IWF's 0.33% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWF
iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.33%0.36%0.46%0.67%0.91%0.49%0.66%0.99%1.27%1.10%1.43%1.37%
ROUS
Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF
1.32%1.52%1.62%1.91%1.88%1.38%2.01%2.12%1.89%1.54%1.97%1.62%

Frequently Asked Questions


ROUS and IWF have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWF has higher volatility (3.61%) compared to ROUS (2.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ROUS dropped -35.51% vs IWF's -64.25%.

On 10-year performance, IWF leads with 18.49% vs 13.01% for ROUS. On fees, IWF is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, ROUS has been the lower-risk option at 2.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWF has performed better with a 18.49% return vs 13.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWF is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ROUS.

ROUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.33% for IWF.

ROUS tracks Hartford Multi-factor Large Cap Index, while IWF tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Hartford and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ROUS and 0.18% for IWF.

ROUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs 1.67), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ROUS and IWF

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