PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VOT vs. IWP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VOT vs. IWP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VOT achieves a 5.49% return, which is significantly higher than IWP's 1.66% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with VOT having a 11.95% annualized return and IWP not far ahead at 12.22%.


VOT

1D
0.12%
1M
1.80%
YTD
5.49%
6M
3.73%
1Y
7.75%
3Y*
15.09%
5Y*
6.19%
10Y*
11.95%

IWP

1D
-0.06%
1M
1.28%
YTD
1.66%
6M
0.18%
1Y
2.82%
3Y*
15.01%
5Y*
5.99%
10Y*
12.22%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VOT vs. IWP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VOT
Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF
5.49%10.72%16.38%23.10%-28.87%20.50%34.50%33.76%-5.56%21.80%
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
1.66%8.45%21.86%25.70%-26.90%12.60%35.25%35.04%-4.89%24.93%

Correlation

The correlation between VOT and IWP 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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2006

0.98

The correlation between VOT and IWP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

VOT vs. IWP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
VOT
IWP

Technology

28.9%
20.0%

Industrials

23.7%
24.2%

Consumer Cyclical

13.9%
21.1%

Healthcare

9.3%
13.5%

Financial Services

6.8%
6.9%

Real Estate

4.8%
1.4%

Communication Services

3.8%
4.2%

Utilities

3.5%
2.9%

Energy

2.7%
3.8%

Basic Materials

1.8%
0.4%

Consumer Defensive

0.8%
1.5%

Technology

VOT
28.9%
IWP
20.0%

Industrials

VOT
23.7%
IWP
24.2%

Consumer Cyclical

VOT
13.9%
IWP
21.1%

Healthcare

VOT
9.3%
IWP
13.5%

Financial Services

VOT
6.8%
IWP
6.9%

Real Estate

VOT
4.8%
IWP
1.4%

Communication Services

VOT
3.8%
IWP
4.2%

Utilities

VOT
3.5%
IWP
2.9%

Energy

VOT
2.7%
IWP
3.8%

Basic Materials

VOT
1.8%
IWP
0.4%

Consumer Defensive

VOT
0.8%
IWP
1.5%

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

VOT vs. IWP — Risk / Return Rank

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

VOT
VOT Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
VOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
VOT Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
VOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
VOT Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

IWP
IWP Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
IWP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWP Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWP Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
IWP Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWP Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

VOT vs. IWP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP). 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.


VOTIWPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.04

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.49

0.19

+0.30

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.46

0.56

+0.90

VOT vs. IWP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VOT Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is higher than the IWP Sharpe Ratio of 0.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VOT and IWP, 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


VOTIWPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.48

0.17

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

0.27

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

0.57

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.42

+0.02

Drawdowns

VOT vs. IWP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VOT drawdown since its inception was -60.16%, which is greater than IWP's maximum drawdown of -56.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VOT and IWP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VOTIWPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.16%

-56.92%

-3.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.96%

-14.79%

-1.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.77%

-25.20%

+3.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.19%

-38.62%

+1.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.19%

-38.62%

+1.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.48%

-4.08%

+0.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.96%

-9.68%

-0.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.33%

5.08%

+0.25%

Volatility

VOT vs. IWP - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) has a higher volatility of 5.45% compared to iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IWP) at 4.62%. This indicates that VOT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VOTIWPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.45%

4.62%

+0.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.85%

12.93%

-0.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.20%

16.71%

-0.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.41%

22.34%

-0.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.02%

21.70%

-0.68%

VOT vs. IWP - Expense Ratio Comparison

VOT has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than IWP's 0.23% 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

VOT vs. IWP - Dividend Comparison

VOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, more than IWP's 0.33% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWP
iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.33%0.37%0.40%0.54%0.77%0.30%0.38%0.59%1.02%0.78%1.16%0.98%
VOT
Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.63%0.64%0.67%0.71%0.78%0.34%0.56%0.78%0.84%0.72%0.81%0.81%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, VOT and IWP 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.

VOT has higher volatility (5.45%) compared to IWP (4.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VOT dropped -60.16% vs IWP's -56.92%.

On 10-year performance, IWP leads with 12.22% vs 11.95% for VOT. On fees, VOT is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, IWP has been the lower-risk option at 4.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWP has performed better with a 12.22% return vs 11.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VOT is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for IWP.

VOT has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.33% for IWP.

VOT tracks CRSP US Mid Cap Growth Index, while IWP tracks Russell Midcap Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for VOT and 0.23% for IWP.

VOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.48 vs 0.17), 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 VOT and IWP

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