PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
VPC vs. IWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

VPC vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

VPC (Virtus Private Credit ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VPC is a Nontraditional Bonds fund tracking the Indxx Private Credit Index, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, VPC returned 1.17%/yr vs 6.11%/yr for IWM. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. VPC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

VPC vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Virtus Private Credit ETF (VPC) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VPC achieves a -9.26% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 17.07% return.

VPC

1D
-1.89%
1M
-5.24%
YTD
-9.26%
6M
-10.18%
1Y
-12.88%
3Y*
2.85%
5Y*
1.17%
10Y*
—

IWM

1D
-1.37%
1M
3.52%
YTD
17.07%
6M
15.83%
1Y
39.10%
3Y*
17.88%
5Y*
6.11%
10Y*
10.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VPC vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
VPC
Virtus Private Credit ETF		-9.26%-6.75%10.52%22.20%-11.70%34.18%-9.50%9.32%
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		17.07%12.66%11.38%16.83%-20.48%14.54%20.03%12.04%

Correlation

The correlation between VPC and IWM is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.48

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

0.57

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

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2019

0.62

The correlation between VPC and IWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.63 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

VPC vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
VPC
IWM

Financial Services

98.3%
15.8%

Technology

1.3%
19.5%

Communication Services

0.1%
2.0%

Industrials

0.1%
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

0.1%
7.8%

Healthcare

0.0%
15.8%

Energy

0.0%
6.0%

Basic Materials

-

4.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.1%

Real Estate

-

5.7%

Utilities

-

3.0%

Financial Services

VPC
98.3%
IWM
15.8%

Technology

VPC
1.3%
IWM
19.5%

Communication Services

VPC
0.1%
IWM
2.0%

Industrials

VPC
0.1%
IWM
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

VPC
0.1%
IWM
7.8%

Healthcare

VPC
0.0%
IWM
15.8%

Energy

VPC
0.0%
IWM
6.0%

Basic Materials

VPC

-

IWM
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

VPC

-

IWM
2.1%

Real Estate

VPC

-

IWM
5.7%

Utilities

VPC

-

IWM
3.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Virtus Private Credit ETF

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Often compared with VPC:
VPC vs. PSPVPC vs. PEXVPC vs. SPYVPC vs. QAIVPC vs. VRPVPC vs. VYMVPC vs. SCHG
Often compared with IWM:
IWM vs. SPYIWM vs. VTWOIWM vs. IJRIWM vs. AVUVIWM vs. IWNIWM vs. VOOIWM vs. IWO

Return for Risk

VPC vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
VPC
VPC Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
VPC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VPC Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
VPC Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
VPC Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
VPC Martin Ratio Rank: 33
Martin Ratio Rank
IWM
IWM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

VPC vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus Private Credit ETF (VPC) 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.

VPCIWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.98
2.05

-3.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
-1.33
2.85

-4.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.85

1.34

-0.49

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.57

3.56

-4.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.13

12.64

-13.77

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

VPC vs. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VPC Sharpe Ratio is -0.98, which is lower than the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VPC and IWM, 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

VPCIWMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.98

2.05

-3.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.09

0.27

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.48

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.20

0.37

-0.17

Drawdowns

VPC vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VPC drawdown since its inception was -53.45%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VPC and IWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

VPCIWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.45%

-59.05%

+5.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.76%

-11.03%

-11.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.86%

-27.50%

+2.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.86%

-31.91%

+7.05%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-41.13%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.63%

-1.49%

-18.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.67%

-10.77%

+3.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.45%

3.10%

+8.35%

Volatility

VPC vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Virtus Private Credit ETF (VPC) is 3.27%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that VPC 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

VPCIWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.27%

5.75%

-2.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.85%

13.53%

-2.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.17%

19.20%

-6.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.50%

22.52%

-9.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.56%

23.04%

-2.48%

VPC vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

VPC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

VPC vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

VPC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 17.30%, more than IWM's 0.88% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWM
iShares Russell 2000 ETF		0.88%1.04%1.15%1.35%1.48%0.94%1.04%1.26%1.40%1.26%1.38%1.54%
VPC
Virtus Private Credit ETF		17.30%14.33%11.26%11.71%10.74%6.31%10.06%8.19%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

VPC and IWM have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to VPC (3.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VPC dropped -53.45% vs IWM's -59.05%.

On 5-year performance, IWM leads with 6.11% vs 1.17% for VPC. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, VPC has been the lower-risk option at 3.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWM has performed better with a 6.11% return vs 1.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for VPC.

VPC has the higher dividend yield at 17.30%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

VPC is categorized as Nontraditional Bonds, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. VPC tracks Indxx Private Credit Index, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Virtus Investment Partners and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for VPC and 0.19% for IWM.

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs -0.98), 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 VPC 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