PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RXI vs. IWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RXI vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RXI achieves a -3.90% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return. Over the past 10 years, RXI has underperformed IWM with an annualized return of 9.76%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.93% annualized return.


RXI

1D
-1.18%
1M
0.98%
YTD
-3.90%
6M
-3.55%
1Y
5.51%
3Y*
11.38%
5Y*
4.22%
10Y*
9.76%

IWM

1D
-1.37%
1M
3.52%
YTD
17.07%
6M
15.83%
1Y
39.10%
3Y*
17.88%
5Y*
6.11%
10Y*
10.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RXI vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RXI
iShares Global Consumer Discretionary ETF
-3.90%13.16%17.26%27.57%-29.08%16.32%24.46%26.78%-6.30%22.94%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
17.07%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%25.39%-11.12%14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between RXI and IWM is 0.72, 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

0.72

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

0.73

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

0.79

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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2006

0.77

The correlation between RXI and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

RXI vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RXI
IWM

Consumer Cyclical

95.1%
7.8%

Technology

3.7%
19.5%

Consumer Defensive

0.8%
2.1%

Industrials

0.2%
17.1%

Communication Services

0.2%
2.0%

Basic Materials

-

4.5%

Energy

-

6.0%

Financial Services

-

15.8%

Healthcare

-

15.8%

Real Estate

-

5.7%

Utilities

-

3.0%

Consumer Cyclical

RXI
95.1%
IWM
7.8%

Technology

RXI
3.7%
IWM
19.5%

Consumer Defensive

RXI
0.8%
IWM
2.1%

Industrials

RXI
0.2%
IWM
17.1%

Communication Services

RXI
0.2%
IWM
2.0%

Basic Materials

RXI

-

IWM
4.5%

Energy

RXI

-

IWM
6.0%

Financial Services

RXI

-

IWM
15.8%

Healthcare

RXI

-

IWM
15.8%

Real Estate

RXI

-

IWM
5.7%

Utilities

RXI

-

IWM
3.0%

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

RXI vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RXI
RXI Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
RXI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RXI Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
RXI Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
RXI Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
RXI Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

RXI vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Consumer Discretionary ETF (RXI) 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.


RXIIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.71

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.34

-0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.36

3.56

-3.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.10

12.64

-11.54

RXI vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RXI Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is lower than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RXI 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RXIIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

2.05

-1.71

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

0.27

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

0.48

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.37

+0.04

Drawdowns

RXI vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RXI drawdown since its inception was -60.36%, roughly equal to the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RXI and IWM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RXIIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.36%

-59.05%

-1.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.17%

-11.03%

-4.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.64%

-27.50%

+7.86%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.78%

-31.91%

-3.87%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.78%

-41.13%

+5.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.64%

-1.49%

-6.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.54%

-10.77%

+0.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.02%

3.10%

+1.92%

Volatility

RXI vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Consumer Discretionary ETF (RXI) is 5.06%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that RXI 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RXIIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.06%

5.75%

-0.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.40%

13.53%

-1.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.38%

19.20%

-2.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.92%

22.52%

-1.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.13%

23.04%

-2.91%

RXI vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RXI has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.


Dividends

RXI vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

RXI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF
0.88%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
RXI
iShares Global Consumer Discretionary ETF
1.62%1.55%1.07%1.00%1.00%0.89%0.65%1.48%1.73%1.26%1.77%1.17%

Frequently Asked Questions


RXI and IWM have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to RXI (5.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RXI dropped -60.36% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.93% vs 9.76% for RXI. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, RXI has been the lower-risk option at 5.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.93% return vs 9.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for RXI.

RXI has the higher dividend yield at 1.62%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

RXI is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. RXI tracks S&P Global Consumer Discretionary Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for RXI and 0.19% for IWM.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 0.34), 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 RXI and IWM

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