PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RWJ vs. IWN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RWJ vs. IWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWJ achieves a 15.88% return, which is significantly lower than IWN's 17.42% return. Over the past 10 years, RWJ has outperformed IWN with an annualized return of 13.02%, while IWN has yielded a comparatively lower 10.16% annualized return.


RWJ

1D
-1.07%
1M
1.90%
YTD
15.88%
6M
14.97%
1Y
36.55%
3Y*
16.43%
5Y*
7.73%
10Y*
13.02%

IWN

1D
-1.31%
1M
2.73%
YTD
17.42%
6M
16.54%
1Y
41.15%
3Y*
17.66%
5Y*
6.48%
10Y*
10.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RWJ vs. IWN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RWJ
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF
15.88%7.75%11.81%16.21%-10.97%52.82%20.83%20.29%-16.95%5.30%
IWN
iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF
17.42%12.40%7.63%14.56%-14.77%27.96%4.66%22.01%-13.01%7.69%

Correlation

The correlation between RWJ and IWN is 0.92, 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

0.92

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

0.95

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

0.95

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

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2008

0.92

The correlation between RWJ and IWN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWJ vs. IWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RWJ
IWN

Consumer Cyclical

23.9%
8.7%

Industrials

16.2%
11.1%

Healthcare

11.2%
8.8%

Financial Services

11.0%
24.2%

Technology

9.9%
12.4%

Energy

7.4%
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
2.0%

Basic Materials

5.2%
5.4%

Real Estate

4.0%
10.2%

Communication Services

3.3%
1.6%

Utilities

0.9%
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

RWJ
23.9%
IWN
8.7%

Industrials

RWJ
16.2%
IWN
11.1%

Healthcare

RWJ
11.2%
IWN
8.8%

Financial Services

RWJ
11.0%
IWN
24.2%

Technology

RWJ
9.9%
IWN
12.4%

Energy

RWJ
7.4%
IWN
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

RWJ
6.9%
IWN
2.0%

Basic Materials

RWJ
5.2%
IWN
5.4%

Real Estate

RWJ
4.0%
IWN
10.2%

Communication Services

RWJ
3.3%
IWN
1.6%

Utilities

RWJ
0.9%
IWN
5.7%

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

RWJ vs. IWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWJ
RWJ Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
RWJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWJ Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
RWJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWJ Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

IWN
IWN Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
IWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWN Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
IWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWN Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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.

RWJ vs. IWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN). 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.


RWJIWNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.40

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.25

4.89

-1.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.39

16.44

-6.05

RWJ vs. IWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the IWN Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWJ and IWN, 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


RWJIWNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.90

2.33

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.33

0.30

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

0.44

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.39

+0.07

Drawdowns

RWJ vs. IWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWJ drawdown since its inception was -55.97%, smaller than the maximum IWN drawdown of -61.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWJ and IWN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RWJIWNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.97%

-61.55%

+5.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.31%

-8.45%

-2.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.29%

-26.70%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.29%

-26.70%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.33%

-46.08%

-5.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.07%

-1.47%

+0.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.24%

-10.16%

+0.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.53%

2.51%

+1.02%

Volatility

RWJ vs. IWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) is 4.64%, while iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) has a volatility of 4.91%. This indicates that RWJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RWJIWNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.64%

4.91%

-0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.29%

11.86%

+0.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.40%

17.81%

+1.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.71%

21.43%

+2.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.14%

23.39%

+2.75%

RWJ vs. IWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWJ has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than IWN's 0.24% expense ratio.


Dividends

RWJ vs. IWN - Dividend Comparison

RWJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than IWN's 1.46% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWN
iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF
1.46%1.70%1.80%2.04%2.12%1.48%1.60%1.92%1.99%1.78%1.74%2.15%
RWJ
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF
1.01%1.11%1.15%1.34%1.02%0.61%0.89%1.22%1.44%1.11%0.60%0.74%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, RWJ and IWN 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.

IWN has higher volatility (4.91%) compared to RWJ (4.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWJ dropped -55.97% vs IWN's -61.55%.

On 10-year performance, RWJ leads with 13.02% vs 10.16% for IWN. On fees, IWN is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, RWJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RWJ has performed better with a 13.02% return vs 10.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWN is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWJ.

IWN has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 1.01% for RWJ.

RWJ tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue-Weighted Index, while IWN tracks Russell 2000 Value Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWJ and 0.24% for IWN.

IWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.90), 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 RWJ and IWN

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