RSSL vs. ISCMF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RSSL (Global X Russell 2000 ETF) and ISCMF (iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSSL is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 RIC Capped Index, while ISCMF is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RSSL returned 41.18% vs 31.30% for ISCMF. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. RSSL charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for ISCMF.

Performance

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Russell 2000 ETF (RSSL) and iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSSL achieves a 20.32% return, which is significantly lower than ISCMF's 22.87% return.

RSSL

• 1D: -0.99%
• 1M: 3.83%
• YTD: 20.32%
• 6M: 17.70%
• 1Y: 41.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ISCMF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -4.99%
• YTD: 22.87%
• 6M: 22.87%
• 1Y: 31.30%
• 3Y*: 16.78%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RSSL Global X Russell 2000 ETF	20.32%	12.87%	10.21%
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF	22.87%	19.65%	-6.61%

Correlation

The correlation between RSSL and ISCMF is -0.08, 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	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2024	-0.04

Return for Risk

RSSL vs. ISCMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSSL

RSSL Risk / Return Rank: 72
RSSL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
RSSL Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
RSSL Omega Ratio Rank: 62
RSSL Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
RSSL Martin Ratio Rank: 77

ISCMF

ISCMF Risk / Return Rank: 78
ISCMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
ISCMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
ISCMF Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ISCMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
ISCMF Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 ETF (RSSL) and iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF). 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.

	RSSL	ISCMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	1.76	+0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.88	3.18	-0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	2.31	-0.97
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.78	5.53	-1.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.29	11.85	+1.44

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSSL Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the ISCMF Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSSL and ISCMF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSSL drawdown since its inception was -27.79%, which is greater than ISCMF's maximum drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSSL and ISCMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSSL	ISCMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.79%	-25.42%	-2.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.93%	-5.69%	-5.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.62%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.99%	-5.26%	+4.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.58%	-13.35%	+7.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.11%	2.65%	+0.46%

Volatility

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Volatility Comparison

Global X Russell 2000 ETF (RSSL) has a higher volatility of 6.41% compared to iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) at 5.11%. This indicates that RSSL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISCMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSSL	ISCMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.41%	5.11%	+1.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.20%	15.45%	-1.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.69%	17.84%	+1.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.51%	14.29%	+8.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.51%	14.29%	+8.22%

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSSL has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than ISCMF's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

RSSL vs. ISCMF - Dividend Comparison

RSSL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, while ISCMF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSSL Global X Russell 2000 ETF	1.25%	1.35%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSSL and ISCMF in my portfolio?

RSSL and ISCMF have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSSL or ISCMF?

RSSL has higher volatility (6.41%) compared to ISCMF (5.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSSL dropped -27.79% vs ISCMF's -25.42%.

Which ETF is better, RSSL or ISCMF?

On 1-year performance, RSSL leads with 41.18% vs 31.30% for ISCMF. On fees, RSSL is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, ISCMF has been the lower-risk option at 5.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSSL or ISCMF?

Over the 1-year period, RSSL has performed better with a 41.18% return vs 31.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSSL or ISCMF?

RSSL is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ISCMF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSSL or ISCMF?

RSSL has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.00% for ISCMF.

What is the main difference between RSSL and ISCMF?

RSSL is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while ISCMF is Commodities. RSSL tracks Russell 2000 RIC Capped Index, while ISCMF tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for RSSL and 0.19% for ISCMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSSL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.76), 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.