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

Performance

SQLV vs. IWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) 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, SQLV achieves a 12.76% return, which is significantly lower than IWN's 17.42% return.


SQLV

1D
-1.66%
1M
1.74%
YTD
12.76%
6M
12.70%
1Y
25.91%
3Y*
12.10%
5Y*
6.01%
10Y*

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)

SQLV vs. IWN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SQLV
Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF
12.76%2.50%4.76%21.21%-12.86%37.14%7.13%17.41%-10.55%8.51%
IWN
iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF
17.42%12.40%7.63%14.56%-14.77%27.96%4.66%22.01%-13.01%6.85%

Correlation

The correlation between SQLV and IWN is 0.90, 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

0.90

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

0.94

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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2017

0.77

The correlation between SQLV and IWN shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (all time) to 0.94 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SQLV vs. IWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SQLV
IWN

Financial Services

18.7%
24.2%

Healthcare

18.0%
8.8%

Technology

15.4%
12.4%

Consumer Cyclical

14.2%
8.7%

Industrials

10.3%
11.1%

Consumer Defensive

8.7%
2.0%

Communication Services

5.3%
1.6%

Energy

4.4%
9.2%

Basic Materials

4.2%
5.4%

Real Estate

0.6%
10.2%

Utilities

0.3%
5.7%

Financial Services

SQLV
18.7%
IWN
24.2%

Healthcare

SQLV
18.0%
IWN
8.8%

Technology

SQLV
15.4%
IWN
12.4%

Consumer Cyclical

SQLV
14.2%
IWN
8.7%

Industrials

SQLV
10.3%
IWN
11.1%

Consumer Defensive

SQLV
8.7%
IWN
2.0%

Communication Services

SQLV
5.3%
IWN
1.6%

Energy

SQLV
4.4%
IWN
9.2%

Basic Materials

SQLV
4.2%
IWN
5.4%

Real Estate

SQLV
0.6%
IWN
10.2%

Utilities

SQLV
0.3%
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

SQLV vs. IWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

SQLV
SQLV Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
SQLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SQLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SQLV Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
SQLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
SQLV Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
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.

SQLV vs. IWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) 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.


SQLVIWNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.85

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.40

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.94

4.89

-1.95

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.77

16.44

-7.67

SQLV vs. IWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SQLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is lower than the IWN Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SQLV 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


SQLVIWNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.48

2.33

-0.85

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

0.30

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.39

0.00

Drawdowns

SQLV vs. IWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SQLV drawdown since its inception was -48.34%, smaller than the maximum IWN drawdown of -61.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SQLV and IWN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SQLVIWNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.34%

-61.55%

+13.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.84%

-8.45%

-0.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.86%

-26.70%

-0.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.86%

-26.70%

-0.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.66%

-1.47%

-0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.95%

-10.16%

+1.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.96%

2.51%

+0.45%

Volatility

SQLV vs. IWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) is 4.30%, while iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) has a volatility of 4.91%. This indicates that SQLV 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


SQLVIWNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.30%

4.91%

-0.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.36%

11.86%

-0.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.70%

17.81%

-0.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.99%

21.43%

-0.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.36%

23.39%

-0.03%

SQLV vs. IWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

SQLV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IWN's 0.24% expense ratio.


Dividends

SQLV vs. IWN - Dividend Comparison

SQLV'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%
SQLV
Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF
1.01%1.15%1.11%1.09%1.24%1.12%1.22%1.20%1.08%0.40%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


SQLV and IWN have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWN has higher volatility (4.91%) compared to SQLV (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SQLV dropped -48.34% vs IWN's -61.55%.

On 5-year performance, IWN leads with 6.48% vs 6.01% for SQLV. On fees, IWN is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, SQLV has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWN has performed better with a 6.48% return vs 6.01%. 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 0.60% for SQLV.

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

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for SQLV and 0.24% for IWN.

IWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.48), 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 SQLV 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