VB vs. IWM
VB (Vanguard Small-Cap ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - VB tracks the CRSP US Small Cap Index while IWM tracks the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, VB returned 11.09%/yr vs 10.76%/yr for IWM. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. VB charges 0.05%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
VB vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, VB achieves a 15.60% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 19.72% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with VB having a 11.09% annualized return and IWM not far behind at 10.76%.
VB
- 1D
- -0.66%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- 6M
- 9.54%
- YTD
- 15.60%
- 1Y
- 23.89%
- 3Y*
- 15.01%
- 5Y*
- 7.84%
- 10Y*
- 11.09%
IWM
- 1D
- -0.85%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- 6M
- 12.70%
- YTD
- 19.72%
- 1Y
- 33.75%
- 3Y*
- 16.65%
- 5Y*
- 7.37%
- 10Y*
- 10.76%
VB vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF | 15.60% | 8.87% | 14.17% | 18.22% | -17.51% | 17.57% | 19.19% | 27.34% | -9.34% | 16.26% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 19.72% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -11.12% | 14.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between VB and IWM is 0.96 - 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 | 0.96 |
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 | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2004 | 0.98 |
The correlation between VB and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
VB vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
VB
IWM
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Communication Services
Industrials
VB
IWM
Technology
VB
IWM
Financial Services
VB
IWM
Healthcare
VB
IWM
Consumer Cyclical
VB
IWM
Real Estate
VB
IWM
Basic Materials
VB
IWM
Energy
VB
IWM
Consumer Defensive
VB
IWM
Utilities
VB
IWM
Communication Services
VB
IWM
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
VB vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
VB
IWM
VB vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| VB | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.29 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.67 | 3.07 | -0.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.77 | 10.87 | -1.10 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
VB vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum VB drawdown since its inception was -59.56%, roughly equal to the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VB and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| VB | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.56% | -59.05% | -0.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.98% | -11.03% | +2.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.36% | -27.50% | +2.14% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.15% | -31.91% | +3.76% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.05% | -41.13% | -0.92% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.29% | -2.32% | +0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.40% | -10.73% | +2.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.45% | 3.11% | -0.66% |
Volatility
VB vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) is 4.25%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 4.81%. This indicates that VB 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
| VB | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.25% | 4.81% | -0.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.09% | 14.19% | -2.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.60% | 19.54% | -2.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.76% | 22.56% | -1.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.37% | 23.00% | -1.63% |
VB vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
VB has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
VB vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
VB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%, more than IWM's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.91% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF | 1.22% | 1.33% | 1.30% | 1.55% | 1.59% | 1.24% | 1.14% | 1.39% | 1.67% | 1.35% | 1.50% | 1.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, VB and IWM 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.
IWM has higher volatility (4.81%) compared to VB (4.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VB dropped -59.56% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 10-year performance, VB leads with 11.09% vs 10.76% for IWM. On fees, VB is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, VB has been the lower-risk option at 4.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, VB has performed better with a 11.09% return vs 10.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VB is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IWM.
VB has the higher dividend yield at 1.22%, compared with 0.91% for IWM.
VB tracks CRSP US Small Cap Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for VB and 0.19% for IWM.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.45), 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 VB 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