SIZE vs. IMCB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SIZE (iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF) and IMCB (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds from iShares - SIZE tracks the MSCI USA Low Size Index while IMCB tracks the IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SIZE returned 11.76%/yr vs 11.32%/yr for IMCB. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SIZE charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for IMCB.

Performance

SIZE vs. IMCB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SIZE achieves a 9.07% return, which is significantly lower than IMCB's 14.72% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SIZE having a 11.76% annualized return and IMCB not far behind at 11.32%.

SIZE

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 3.62%
• YTD: 9.07%
• 6M: 8.29%
• 1Y: 18.11%
• 3Y*: 15.94%
• 5Y*: 8.07%
• 10Y*: 11.76%

IMCB

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 5.22%
• YTD: 14.72%
• 6M: 14.61%
• 1Y: 23.24%
• 3Y*: 17.84%
• 5Y*: 8.81%
• 10Y*: 11.32%

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

SIZE vs. IMCB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SIZE iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF	9.07%	10.51%	14.37%	17.78%	-15.86%	25.05%	16.26%	28.97%	-6.59%	18.76%
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	14.72%	10.25%	15.10%	16.37%	-16.09%	22.81%	13.35%	31.49%	-11.53%	19.70%

Correlation

The correlation between SIZE and IMCB is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2013	0.90

The correlation between SIZE and IMCB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

SIZE vs. IMCB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SIZE	IMCB
Technology	19.9%	21.3%
Industrials	16.1%	19.0%
Financial Services	13.5%	12.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	9.0%
Healthcare	9.6%	7.9%
Real Estate	5.7%	4.3%
Consumer Defensive	5.7%	5.1%
Utilities	5.5%	6.2%
Energy	5.2%	7.4%
Basic Materials	4.8%	5.3%
Communication Services	4.1%	2.3%

Return for Risk

SIZE vs. IMCB — Risk / Return Rank

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

SIZE

SIZE Risk / Return Rank: 44
SIZE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
SIZE Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
SIZE Omega Ratio Rank: 38
SIZE Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
SIZE Martin Ratio Rank: 52

IMCB

IMCB Risk / Return Rank: 56
IMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
IMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
IMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 51
IMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
IMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

SIZE vs. IMCB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB). 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.

	SIZE	IMCB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	1.83	-0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.12	2.61	-0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.32	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.28	2.90	-0.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.88	11.50	-2.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SIZE vs. IMCB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIZE Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the IMCB Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIZE and IMCB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SIZE	IMCB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	1.83	-0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47	0.50	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63	0.58	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.68	0.50	+0.18

Drawdowns

SIZE vs. IMCB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIZE drawdown since its inception was -39.15%, smaller than the maximum IMCB drawdown of -58.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIZE and IMCB.

Drawdown Indicators

	SIZE	IMCB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.15%	-58.80%	+19.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.97%	-8.05%	+0.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.71%	-19.80%	+1.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.03%	-25.15%	+1.12%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.15%	-40.99%	+1.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-0.24%	-0.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.18%	-7.73%	+3.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.03%	+0.01%

Volatility

SIZE vs. IMCB - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) have volatilities of 3.17% and 3.31%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SIZE	IMCB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.17%	3.31%	-0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.54%	9.58%	-0.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.73%	12.75%	-0.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.39%	17.57%	-0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.69%	19.65%	-0.96%

SIZE vs. IMCB - Expense Ratio Comparison

SIZE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCB's 0.04% 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

SIZE vs. IMCB - Dividend Comparison

SIZE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, more than IMCB's 1.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	1.21%	1.42%	1.43%	1.55%	1.70%	1.08%	1.12%	1.32%	1.80%	1.31%	1.79%	1.47%
SIZE iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF	1.42%	1.50%	1.53%	1.42%	1.59%	1.19%	1.43%	1.35%	2.43%	1.58%	1.88%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SIZE and IMCB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, SIZE and IMCB 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.

Which is riskier, SIZE or IMCB?

IMCB has higher volatility (3.31%) compared to SIZE (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIZE dropped -39.15% vs IMCB's -58.80%.

Which ETF is better, SIZE or IMCB?

On 10-year performance, SIZE leads with 11.76% vs 11.32% for IMCB. On fees, IMCB is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SIZE has been the lower-risk option at 3.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SIZE or IMCB?

Over the 10-year period, SIZE has performed better with a 11.76% return vs 11.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SIZE or IMCB?

IMCB is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for SIZE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SIZE or IMCB?

SIZE has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 1.21% for IMCB.

What is the main difference between SIZE and IMCB?

SIZE tracks MSCI USA Low Size Index, while IMCB tracks IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SIZE and 0.04% for IMCB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IMCB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.43), 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.