RSSL vs. IWC
RSSL (Global X Russell 2000 ETF) and IWC (iShares Micro-Cap ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - RSSL tracks the Russell 2000 RIC Capped Index while IWC tracks the Russell Microcap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RSSL returned 43.38% vs 61.79% for IWC. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RSSL charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for IWC.
Performance
RSSL vs. IWC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RSSL achieves a 18.48% return, which is significantly lower than IWC's 21.51% return.
RSSL
- 1D
- 0.94%
- 1M
- 4.34%
- YTD
- 18.48%
- 6M
- 19.47%
- 1Y
- 43.38%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWC
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 5.14%
- YTD
- 21.51%
- 6M
- 25.02%
- 1Y
- 61.79%
- 3Y*
- 22.59%
- 5Y*
- 5.97%
- 10Y*
- 11.58%
RSSL vs. IWC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
RSSL Global X Russell 2000 ETF | 18.48% | 12.87% | 8.83% |
IWC iShares Micro-Cap ETF | 21.51% | 22.45% | 12.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between RSSL and IWC is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2024 | 0.94 |
The correlation between RSSL and IWC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.
RSSL vs. IWC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RSSL
IWC
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
RSSL
IWC
Technology
RSSL
IWC
Healthcare
RSSL
IWC
Financial Services
RSSL
IWC
Consumer Cyclical
RSSL
IWC
Real Estate
RSSL
IWC
Energy
RSSL
IWC
Basic Materials
RSSL
IWC
Utilities
RSSL
IWC
Communication Services
RSSL
IWC
Consumer Defensive
RSSL
IWC
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
RSSL vs. IWC — Risk / Return Rank
RSSL
IWC
RSSL vs. IWC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Russell 2000 ETF (RSSL) and iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC). 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.
| RSSL | IWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.28 | 2.64 | -0.36 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.12 | 3.41 | -0.28 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.41 | -0.04 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.96 | 4.97 | -1.01 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.98 | 16.48 | -2.49 |
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
| RSSL | IWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.28 | 2.64 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.25 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.93 | 0.32 | +0.61 |
Drawdowns
RSSL vs. IWC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RSSL drawdown since its inception was -27.79%, smaller than the maximum IWC drawdown of -64.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSSL and IWC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RSSL | IWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.79% | -64.61% | +36.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.93% | -12.43% | +1.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -29.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -40.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -47.21% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.15% | -0.83% | +0.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.71% | -15.28% | +9.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.10% | 3.75% | -0.65% |
Volatility
RSSL vs. IWC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Russell 2000 ETF (RSSL) is 5.62%, while iShares Micro-Cap ETF (IWC) has a volatility of 6.90%. This indicates that RSSL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RSSL | IWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.62% | 6.90% | -1.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.49% | 17.20% | -3.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.11% | 23.52% | -4.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.46% | 24.40% | -1.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.46% | 24.42% | -1.96% |
RSSL vs. IWC - Expense Ratio Comparison
RSSL has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than IWC's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
RSSL vs. IWC - Dividend Comparison
RSSL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%, more than IWC's 0.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWC iShares Micro-Cap ETF | 0.89% | 1.10% | 1.06% | 1.17% | 1.18% | 0.78% | 0.98% | 1.19% | 1.01% | 1.09% | 1.16% | 1.49% |
RSSL Global X Russell 2000 ETF | 1.27% | 1.35% | 0.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, RSSL and IWC 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.
IWC has higher volatility (6.90%) compared to RSSL (5.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSSL dropped -27.79% vs IWC's -64.61%.
On 1-year performance, IWC leads with 61.79% vs 43.38% for RSSL. On fees, RSSL is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, RSSL has been the lower-risk option at 5.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IWC has performed better with a 61.79% return vs 43.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RSSL is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for IWC.
RSSL has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.89% for IWC.
RSSL tracks Russell 2000 RIC Capped Index, while IWC tracks Russell Microcap Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for RSSL and 0.60% for IWC.
IWC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 2.28), 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 RSSL and IWC
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