VOTE vs. IWB
VOTE (Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF) and IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - VOTE tracks the Morningstar US Large Cap Index while IWB tracks the Russell 1000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, VOTE returned 23.05%/yr vs 22.28%/yr for IWB. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. VOTE charges 0.05%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for IWB.
Performance
VOTE vs. IWB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with VOTE having a 11.51% return and IWB slightly lower at 11.04%.
VOTE
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- 4.81%
- YTD
- 11.51%
- 6M
- 11.46%
- 1Y
- 28.65%
- 3Y*
- 23.05%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWB
- 1D
- 0.45%
- 1M
- 4.62%
- YTD
- 11.04%
- 6M
- 10.89%
- 1Y
- 27.62%
- 3Y*
- 22.28%
- 5Y*
- 13.09%
- 10Y*
- 15.16%
VOTE vs. IWB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VOTE Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF | 11.51% | 17.95% | 25.23% | 27.60% | -19.74% | 12.08% |
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF | 11.04% | 17.18% | 24.32% | 26.39% | -19.19% | 11.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between VOTE and IWB is 0.99 - 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 | 0.99 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2021 | 0.99 |
The correlation between VOTE and IWB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.
VOTE vs. IWB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
VOTE
IWB
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
VOTE
IWB
Financial Services
VOTE
IWB
Communication Services
VOTE
IWB
Consumer Cyclical
VOTE
IWB
Healthcare
VOTE
IWB
Industrials
VOTE
IWB
Consumer Defensive
VOTE
IWB
Energy
VOTE
IWB
Utilities
VOTE
IWB
Basic Materials
VOTE
IWB
Real Estate
VOTE
IWB
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
VOTE vs. IWB — Risk / Return Rank
VOTE
IWB
VOTE vs. IWB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) and iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB). 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.
| VOTE | IWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.42 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.16 | 3.13 | +0.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.50 | 14.40 | +0.10 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| VOTE | IWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.38 | 2.33 | +0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.77 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.84 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.81 | 0.45 | +0.35 |
Drawdowns
VOTE vs. IWB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum VOTE drawdown since its inception was -25.71%, smaller than the maximum IWB drawdown of -55.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VOTE and IWB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| VOTE | IWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.71% | -55.38% | +29.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.10% | -8.86% | -0.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.08% | -19.09% | +0.01% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.20% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.60% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.27% | -0.27% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.14% | -10.86% | +4.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.98% | 1.92% | +0.06% |
Volatility
VOTE vs. IWB - Volatility Comparison
Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) and iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) have volatilities of 2.91% and 2.83%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| VOTE | IWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.91% | 2.83% | +0.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.20% | 8.98% | +0.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.08% | 11.92% | +0.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.14% | 17.10% | +0.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.14% | 18.14% | -1.00% |
VOTE vs. IWB - Expense Ratio Comparison
VOTE has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than IWB's 0.15% 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
VOTE vs. IWB - Dividend Comparison
VOTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, less than IWB's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF | 0.91% | 1.00% | 1.14% | 1.31% | 1.56% | 1.09% | 1.37% | 1.71% | 2.06% | 1.64% | 1.89% | 1.95% |
VOTE Engine No. 1 Transform 500 ETF | 0.89% | 1.03% | 1.18% | 1.33% | 1.54% | 0.54% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.99, VOTE and IWB 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.
VOTE has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to IWB (2.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VOTE dropped -25.71% vs IWB's -55.38%.
On 3-year performance, VOTE leads with 23.05% vs 22.28% for IWB. On fees, VOTE is cheaper at 0.05% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, VOTE has performed better with a 23.05% return vs 22.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VOTE is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IWB.
IWB has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.89% for VOTE.
VOTE tracks Morningstar US Large Cap Index, while IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Engine No. 1 LLC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for VOTE and 0.15% for IWB.
VOTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 2.33), 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 VOTE and IWB
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